Log in:  

Register

Malaysian Flight 370?

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

What happened to Malaysian Flight MH370?

Catastrophic failure along flightpath
39
13%
Plane kept flying, eventually crashed way off course
40
13%
Terrorism, of some sort
37
12%
Pilot error of some sort
33
11%
Pilot sabotage of some sort
42
13%
Hijacking - crashed (landed?) far away
47
15%
Didn't you see Airport '77?
34
11%
Wormhole
40
13%
 
Total votes : 312

23 Apr 2014 11:43

Microchip wrote:There's no evidence that either pilot had the temperament or plans to do anything criminal. Neither the stewards and stewardesses. Even the 2 guys who were hitching a ride on other persons' passports have been ruled out as having any nefarious intentions.


humans are weird. the human brain will probably never be fully understood. it all can click in seconds. or they fought the dark all the time but at some point they lost it. normal people for everybody but you can't enter in someone's mind.

you just don't crash a plane, in the middle of indian ocean, out the radar, thousands of kms away of your route.

sad for their families :( that's life ...
Vino 4ever
User avatar jens_attacks
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,778
Joined: 08 Sep 2009 18:00

23 Apr 2014 11:48

Meh, get excited, 777 are great like you say. And its safety record still is remarkable, pretty sure there have been zero confirmed deaths from a 777 as a result of a failure of the aircraft (Asiana were the first deaths period). Granted the Heathrow incident could have been a lot worse...
Ferminal
Veteran
 
Posts: 16,995
Joined: 03 Jul 2009 09:42

23 Apr 2014 11:56

Microchip wrote:There's no evidence that either pilot had the temperament or plans to do anything criminal. Neither the stewards and stewardesses. Even the 2 guys who were hitching a ride on other persons' passports have been ruled out as having any nefarious intentions.

What is interesting is the SILENCE of the news media about the plane itself. Why are they so quiet? It would be NATURAL that the aircraft's condition itself would be on the checklist of things to investigate - just as a matter of routine. CNN actually began to turn toward the topic of decompression, then they stopped discussing it.

This article written in 2009 discusses the same type of plane - Boeing 777 - ALSO owned by Malaysian Airlines: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/automated-to-death

I'm surprised that the American Media hasn't jumped all over this and speculated to death about whether this is the same plane. One CNN anchor said that the plane is now probably covered in silt!!!! They are such drama queens and kings that they suggest all sorts of things on air, it's a wonder they haven't hammered this incident and wondered out loud if it's the same plane.


Decompression, explosive or gradual, will result in all sorts of alarms when the interior pressure goes above 8000 feet or so..The aircrew have quick donning O2 masks..the idea that they passed out is ridiculous.

Somebody turned the transponder off because they wanted to disappear from radar. I think they are looking in the wrong place. Not sure where but after 5 weeks, the debris has scattered. The idea that it didn't break apart is also ridiculous. I think something will wash up somewhere, eventually, be linked to the aircraft but it's actual location will continue to be a mystery.
User avatar Bustedknuckle
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,790
Joined: 23 Jul 2009 15:38
Location: USofA

23 Apr 2014 12:00

Something did wash up today, apparently.
Ferminal
Veteran
 
Posts: 16,995
Joined: 03 Jul 2009 09:42

23 Apr 2014 12:48

Ferminal wrote:Something did wash up today, apparently.


From initial reports it seems it's not related but they are still examining the metal.
movingtarget
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,966
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 08:54

24 Apr 2014 20:47

Bustedknuckle wrote:Somebody turned the transponder off because they wanted to disappear from radar.


there was something about this in german tv, they said there are strict rules how to behave in case of an accident, it says react -> navigate -> inform (translated from german, no idea what are the exact words originally)

so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)
User avatar search
Member
 
Posts: 1,970
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 10:43

24 Apr 2014 20:51

I think it's aviate, navigate, communicate
User avatar roundabout
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,040
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 11:43

24 Apr 2014 20:57

ah, yeh, that sounds better, tried to google it but couldn't find anything, thanks

edit: so maybe I got the order wrong for the first two, I saw that on tv a couple of weeks ago
User avatar search
Member
 
Posts: 1,970
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 10:43

25 Apr 2014 00:57

search wrote:So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)

The only problem with this is that the odds that the autopilot was set to send them to the south Indian Ocean was hyper slim. They would have had to have had an ARCAS failure, plus a transponder failure, plus a full communications failure. Then, manually headed the plane towards Antarctica (presumably an airport on the way) and have the autopilot not fail as it took flew them for hours as they were asphyxiated.

It's possible I suppose, but...

Then again, maybe they're looking in the wrong place by a few thousand miles.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,147
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

25 Apr 2014 04:59

search wrote:...so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)


This really is getting silly. TV people who know absolutely nothing about airline operations are making wild speculations because it brings in viewers: "There's nothing new on this front, so let's make up something sensational...."

As I mentioned on the previous page, the first step in the emergency procedure is to don the oxygen mask, not to go on some wild goose chase in search of the source of the fire:

Image

Step #1 is a memory jog to remind the crew a change of course (diversion to an alternate airfield) might be in order. The second item is the first step in the Emergency Procedure proper: Don oxygen masks and smoke goggles, if needed. The goggles are discretionary; the oxygen mask IS NOT. Anything else would be both illogical and irresponsible, because if the crew pass out, it's game over.

If the crew masked up straight off, how were they supposed to have lost consciousness?

The procedure goes on for a further seven pages, mostly delving into isolating electrical systems and employing fire suppressant measures, but nowhere does it advise to switch off the transponder unless it shows direct evidence of being the source of the smoke or fire.

Speculation that there is anything in the emergency procedures about flying higher to put out the fire is pure silliness. After all, how are you supposed to keep jet engines running if there's too little oxygen to sustain a fire? What do they think jets run on, ...moonbeams?


The only possible scenario that encompasses both airline operational procedures AND the facts of this disappearance begins and ends with
1) a human being
2) with bad intentions
3) in the cockpit.
Styrbjorn the Strong
User avatar StyrbjornSterki
Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 18 Jul 2010 22:00

25 Apr 2014 12:05

search wrote:there was something about this in german tv, they said there are strict rules how to behave in case of an accident, it says react -> navigate -> inform (translated from german, no idea what are the exact words originally)

so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)


Aviate, Navigate, communicate...IF they had a fire and did turn off everything, they would also don their O2 masks, one of the first thing they do when they smell smoke. Unconscious is just silly. They would also head for an alternate..not climb or descend, because they turned off their radio and are flying at night(IFR). I suspect they would also keep the transponder on, squawk 7700(emergency) and controllers would clear the airspace for them.
User avatar Bustedknuckle
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,790
Joined: 23 Jul 2009 15:38
Location: USofA

25 Apr 2014 13:00

Electrical fire knocking out communications systems amongst others.... seems to be the opinion of pilots in my acquaintance.

Not sure we will ever know about this one.
User avatar stutue
Member
 
Posts: 611
Joined: 22 Apr 2014 08:50

25 Apr 2014 14:34

yeah i think so too. and they were heading to antarctica to cool down
Vino 4ever
User avatar jens_attacks
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,778
Joined: 08 Sep 2009 18:00

02 May 2014 15:55

Styrbjorn the Strong
User avatar StyrbjornSterki
Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 18 Jul 2010 22:00

02 May 2014 17:30

Its anyone's guess now
User avatar stutue
Member
 
Posts: 611
Joined: 22 Apr 2014 08:50

02 May 2014 21:37

In both the Paine Stewart crash, and the Helios 522 crash in Greece, the pilots became asphyxiated because of some sort of mis-diagnosed pressure issue. In the Helios crash the alarm that went off in the cockpit was accidentally shut off, the pilots believing it was something else. In both instances the flights continued on their flight path. The Helios jet towards Athens and then into a circling pattern automatically, while the flight attendants tried to break into the cockpit as they likely figured out what was going on and one of the attendants was a (non-commercial) student pilot. But the jet ran out of fuel before they could even try to save it. The Stewart jet just keep flying straight until it crashed.

With MH370s flightpath there is no possible way this happened. No way. A plane doesn’t automatically pick somewhere remote to fly where nothing is and then change course, altitude and speed a few times in the process. It’s just impossible.

A fire taking out electrical systems is possible, maybe. But the odds of the pilots having numerous electrical problems, and then taking the aircraft where it ended up are astronomically small. They would have to lose all electrical, then change course, lose course, then somehow just fly the plane in a direction they knew they wouldn’t find anything for a few hours?

I think Strybjorn has the most plausible, if still uncommon, answer. Someone, be that a pilot or someone else, for whatever the reason, got into the cockpit, knew how to keep others locked out. Knew how to fly well enough, knew how to shut off the transponder and ACARS… and here’s my best guess - planned on hijacking or taking it somewhere, or crashing it somewhere, but got lost over the ocean and eventually it crashed, or ran out of fuel and crashed.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,147
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

02 May 2014 21:52

Its certainly starting to look that way, I agree.

Its about time I went for a drink with my neighbour. He's a long-haul pilot. I'll report back with his thoughts...
User avatar stutue
Member
 
Posts: 611
Joined: 22 Apr 2014 08:50

02 May 2014 21:56

Alpe d'Huez wrote:With MH370s flightpath there is no possible way this happened. No way. A plane doesn’t automatically pick somewhere remote to fly where nothing is and then change course, altitude and speed a few times in the process. It’s just impossible.

A fire taking out electrical systems is possible, maybe. But the odds of the pilots having numerous electrical problems, and then taking the aircraft where it ended up are astronomically small. They would have to lose all electrical, then change course, lose course, then somehow just fly the plane in a direction they knew they wouldn’t find anything for a few hours?


didn't the plane turn towards Langkawi? That was said in a number of media reports
User avatar search
Member
 
Posts: 1,970
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 10:43

03 May 2014 14:18

Not in a direct path it appears. And that's obviously not where it ended up. Keep in mind, it wasn't a straight ahead ghost flight after it passed that point. Someone was flying it.

To correct my previous note, the flight attendant that tried to save Helios 522, Andreas Prodromou, actually did have a commercial pilot's license, but he had no 737 training and entered the cockpit just as the first engine flamed out. Had there been enough fuel, there's a good chance he could have landed it with ATC and ground support. The guy's almost a hero, really. Sad.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,147
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

05 May 2014 11:33

StyrbjornSterki wrote:ELTs are required in all such commercial a/c but radio waves do not propogate well through water. This is why submarines have to surface to communicate with "HQ." There also would have been at least two acoustic "pingers" (one in the CVR and another in the ELT) that are supposed to activate when submerged in water. The problem is that absent a less vague idea where it might have gone down, there's simply too much ocean and too few search vessels to stand any reasonable statistical probability of finding them before their batteries all expire.

There also is a remote possibility the signalling devices all could have been destroyed in the impact. Their design limit is 3400 Gs, and this impact would have generated considerably less than that, but there's a lot of CF in a 777 fuselage, and that stuff gets awfully sharp when it shatters. And bizarre stuff happens when you fly into an incompressible liquid at 90% of the speed of sound. But considering the size of the potential search area, Amsterhammer's characterization of the odds it ever will be found are spot-on.

The simplest explanation that encompasses all the known facts and requires no supernatural or extraterrestrial intervention (Occam's razor) is that at least one of the flight deck crew deliberately flew the a/c out of radar contact until it was almost out of fuel, then flew it straight down into the water. Deliberately nose-dived at full throttles, it could have hit the water at approaching 700 knots (1300 kph, 360 m/s), plunging to a good 100 meters depth before the momentum at impact was spent, and leaving millions of tiny pieces too small to hint they once were part of a 300,000 kg a/c.


Well - that is far from a simple explanation - given that said hypothetical pilot would have to restrain all other flight crew for some time - since the dive did not happen when they turned. Quite possibly have to restrain some pax, too? Not a job for one guy.

However, in my thinking, there was more going on somewhere here than meets the eye. I do think the UAV search would have found something in the search area if it existed. I do think that the search crew(s) are good enough to triangulate a search area based on the pings.

They didn't find it - it's not there. What were the pings? If they were from the plane's flight recorders, but the plane is not there?

I know it was "said" by a fictional character, but Conan Doyle's Holmes' quote here is apropos - when you've ruled out the impossible - whatever is left, however improbable . . .

There aren't any KISS answers here any more.
It is of great use to the sailor to know the length of his line, though he cannot with it fathom all the depths of the ocean. ~ John Locke
User avatar hiero2
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,659
Joined: 10 Jul 2010 19:03
Location: In Descartes' reality

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Back to top