Malaysian Flight 370?

[mewmewmew13]

CNN's Headline News channel actually had a psychic on to tell the world what happened to the plane. Yes, really.



This was on a supposed "news" channel. How much more ridiculous and irresponsible can you be?

That's sad..giving false hope to family friends is horrible…
this is why I have a hard time watching any 'news ' anymore..

 

[adriano01]

I hope that we get the 'best

 

[Alphabet]

Word now is that the pilot deliberately crashed the plane- he was suicidal.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370-c...legraph-newspaper-reports-20140325-hvmf1.html

 

[Ferminal]

I think that's where the money has been since a few days out...

The lives of everyone on board would have been thoroughly dissected now so either none of them were significant or they aren't telling us.

 

[Avoriaz]

Word now is that the pilot deliberately crashed the plane- he was suicidal.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370-c...legraph-newspaper-reports-20140325-hvmf1.html

Seems so, but why fly so far off course before ditching? He could surely have just dived into the South China Sea. Admittedly heading so far south (as appears to be the case) gives no recourse of salvation (i.e. nowhere to land), but seems odd, and must have been hell for the passengers to fly so far and for so long

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Some questions I have not heard answered:

If one of the pilots was suicidal, he must have taken control of the aircraft while the other pilot was in the laboratory. All modern commercial aircraft have solid doors with code locks on them. Is it possible to set the door from the inside to where no one can get in, period? Even if they have the code? I guess so.

Are there no other ways to contact the airline or anyone outside the aircraft, except through the cockpit radio system? I presume this is the case.

If a pilot was suicidal, what was he thinking for the 7 hours in flight from when he shut the transponder and navigation system off? At some point during the flight, the other pilot, flight attendants, and some passengers must have made some attempt to retake the plane. Be that smashing through door, the bulkhead near the cockpit, or underneath to get to the plane's avionics, or anything. Would that have even been possible? They had a good 6 hours to try.

Let's presume it wasn't suicide and something mechanical, like this pilot thinks. What on earth could cause a near total system failure, spread out over a half hour. Then allow the flight to keep going in the wrong direction for another few hours? If there was a fire that killed all systems, and the fire was put out, but the pilots had little more than compass and attitude indicators, they still would likely not have flown at that low of an altitude for that long in that direction. That seems counter-intuitive.

There is talk that investigators are hoping to find the crash and black boxes to see what happened. I know older aircraft have circuit breakers that can be tripped to stop the CVR and FDR from recording. I have to presume that the 777 does not, and the black boxes would have been recording, no matter what?

Older black boxes had a 30 minute maximum. That would do some good on this flight, but really you'd want data on the entire flight. Are the 777's black boxes ones that have more than 8+ hours of data?

Black boxes have emit a "ping" for about 30 days until the battery runs out. Once that ping is gone, the boxes will be much harder to find, especially in 9,000' of water. Such was the case with Adam Air 574 and the Air France 447.

 

[roundabout]

I think they just managed to find Adam Air CVR and FDR prior to the battery running out.

Current CVR is 2 hours, FDR is 25. But I am not an expert and someone with more knowledge is needed to clarify this.

 

[Ferminal]

I thought all CVRs these days would be "unlimited" given there are no physical limitations like the old ribbon. They are just a more complex HDD aren't they?

re: the other pilot, a blunt object by surprise would do the trick, locking him out when he's taking a **** is probably the easiest though if you can block the outside code working.

Once he was alone he could have depressurised and said goodbye to everyone (provided he had sufficient stored O2 whilst they suffocated) but that would only have been possible if the altitude was maintained for some time which I'm not sure is true. Is the crash site the limit of range based on fuel? Maybe it took 6 hours for an uprising to bring it down.

I agree that if he was suicidal (obviously he was suicidal one way or another but if his only aim was to die) a more rapid (a la Air Egypt) or dramatic ending would have been the order of the day. IMO the intentions were far more complex. The same question has to be asked in the case of a third party hijacking too, unless the plan was to create a great mystery.

As for failure of the aircraft being the cause, it would have had to have been something that knocked out every system but without it compromising the structure or control surfaces necessary for the computer to keep it up. A silent decompression as a result of some failure which also disabled the transponder. A fire doesn't really make sense given how quick they can destroy an aircraft. Enough to kill everyone on board rapidly but then extinguishing without compromising the aircraft?

So yeh, crazy pilot for me.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I want to make sure that I emphasize that in no way do I want to diminish the pain the families of those on-board must feel. They are enduring one of the worst things anyone can face.

What is bothering me however is the fact that this is still front-page news two weeks after the plane disappeared. I tuned-in to a major news channel in the US yesterday, and the opening 10 minutes was dedicated to this story. This story has gone from news to sideshow circus. This is no longer news, it's an extended car crash with millions of onlookers.

There are other very news-worthy events that keep getting pushed back. News has become nothing but human interest stories about tragedy rather than stories that reveal and examine issues that have real importance and impact on our lives. Sad.

 

[rhubroma]

I want to make sure that I emphasize that in no way do I want to diminish the pain the families of those on-board must feel. They are enduring one of the worst things anyone can face.

What is bothering me however is the fact that this is still front-page news two weeks after the plane disappeared. I tuned-in to a major news channel in the US yesterday, and the opening 10 minutes was dedicated to this story. This story has gone from news to sideshow circus. This is no longer news, it's an extended car crash with millions of onlookers.

There are other very news-worthy events that keep getting pushed back. News has become nothing but human interest stories about tragedy rather than stories that reveal and examine issues that have real importance and impact on our lives. Sad.

Whatever sells, for which the mass media and the general public shrinks from no baseness. Sooner or later people will be applauding at funerals.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I'm afraid you're both correct. When I started this thread I poked at that notion of the media circus starting, but even I didn't realize it would be this saturated.

Just a point of clarification. With the Adam Air crash the ping from the black boxes was detected about two weeks after the accident, but the boxes themselves were not recovered for many months after that.

 

[Amsterhammer]

According to Jon Stewart, CNN's blanket "breaking news" coverage day after day, resulted in a virtual doubling of their market share. There's your answer, if true. On the other hand, I do think it's fair to say that the unique nature of this mystery has affected a huge number of people - basically, anyone who ever flies long distances, especially over water. Like me.

 

[thirteen]

According to Jon Stewart, CNN's blanket "breaking news" coverage day after day, resulted in a virtual doubling of their market share. There's your answer, if true. On the other hand, I do think it's fair to say that the unique nature of this mystery has affected a huge number of people - basically, anyone who ever flies long distances, especially over water. Like me.

moi aussi… and i always fly a 777

 

[hiero2]

I'm afraid you're both correct. When I started this thread I poked at that notion of the media circus starting, but even I didn't realize it would be this saturated.

Just a point of clarification. With the Adam Air crash the ping from the black boxes was detected about two weeks after the accident, but the boxes themselves were not recovered for many months after that.

I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked, the black boxes do not ping. There are locator beacons in the emergency equipment stores on carriers that I know of. At least, on over-water stuff. But this is one of the current "issues" or complaints about the flight recorders - they only record. Records are not transmitted in real-time. Location is not transmitted in real-time. Given the current ability of technology, one could say they are antiquated.

I think this practice will change as a result of Flight 370.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Despite the talk, flying is extraordinarily safe. My ex was a flight attendant and there was a stat they used to say. I may get the number off, but not by much.

If you flew on a random commercial airline anywhere in the world, every single day, it would be nearly 40,000 years before you were involved in a major accident. And even then, you'd have a greater than 75% chance of surviving.

That stat is improving all the time.

The other one crew members liked to say was that it was more likely you would be killed in a car accident driving to or from the airport, than in an airplane crash.

 

[thirteen]

Alpe, my step-mum was too and I know it's safe…

still, I fly a *lot* (30+ flights last year) and get a little spooked when something like this happens… probably not helped by the fact that i landed at CDG on the day AF477 was supposed to come in and it was madness… that stays with you

 

[fatandfast]

I feel it is a bit much to think that the pilots, even with the worst of intentions could make the aircraft disappear from earth. I tend to think that it went into the water at some strange angel and speed that allowed it to sink without a huge debris field

 

[Ferminal]

Despite the talk, flying is extraordinarily safe. My ex was a flight attendant and there was a stat they used to say. I may get the number off, but not by much.

If you flew on a random commercial airline anywhere in the world, every single day, it would be nearly 40,000 years before you were involved in a major accident. And even then, you'd have a greater than 75% chance of surviving.

That stat is improving all the time.

The other one crew members liked to say was that it was more likely you would be killed in a car accident driving to or from the airport, than in an airplane crash.

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SR0101.pdf

 

[rhubroma]

Despite the talk, flying is extraordinarily safe. My ex was a flight attendant and there was a stat they used to say. I may get the number off, but not by much.

If you flew on a random commercial airline anywhere in the world, every single day, it would be nearly 40,000 years before you were involved in a major accident. And even then, you'd have a greater than 75% chance of surviving.

That stat is improving all the time.

The other one crew members liked to say was that it was more likely you would be killed in a car accident driving to or from the airport, than in an airplane crash.

All you have to be is on the wrong plane. Fortune is a b!tch and if you want her on your side, she needs to be beaten into submission.

PS. Not my words, but Machiavelli's.

 

[Velosport]

The plane was hijacked by UFO. The Malaysian Government knew it but will never admit it. That's why they cannot find any debris or the blackbox til now.

 

[hiero2]

I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked, the black boxes do not ping. There are locator beacons in the emergency equipment stores on carriers that I know of. At least, on over-water stuff. But this is one of the current "issues" or complaints about the flight recorders - they only record. Records are not transmitted in real-time. Location is not transmitted in real-time. Given the current ability of technology, one could say they are antiquated.

I think this practice will change as a result of Flight 370.

Alpe, my step-mum was too and I know it's safe…

still, I fly a *lot* (30+ flights last year) and get a little spooked when something like this happens… probably not helped by the fact that i landed at CDG on the day AF477 was supposed to come in and it was madness… that stays with you

I feel it is a bit much to think that the pilots, even with the worst of intentions could make the aircraft disappear from earth. I tend to think that it went into the water at some strange angel and speed that allowed it to sink without a huge debris field

I have one-up on the ex or mum being an FA. I was a flight attentdant as my first career. I'm now on career 2.5. However, that was also long ago now. Some things DO change. Some things don't.

Flying has been safer than driving for many decades. But the thing is, like that poster meme - flight is particularly unforgiving of errors. Even more than the sea. Also, an air incident catches an undue amount of public attention and fear. Perhaps because of the numbers involved, perhaps because someone else is doing the "driving". Automobile accidents claim far more people, and I'm pretty sure that this is true for every metric - miles traveled, hours traveled, etc. None of which dismisses the gut fear one can get over "this flight being the one". Those fears are real, too.

As for the debris field, it is not only possible, but more likely that there would NOT be a debris field, IF the plane crash-landed on the water. ONLY if there was a mid-air incident to cause a breakup would you normally get debris. If they approached the water at a more or less normal landing angle, I think it would be more likely to not see debris. Sullenberger's river landing is a good example. He didn't hit anything, he didn't blow up, there wasn't a cabin breach (remember the Aloha 243 incident?). For water landing, we were taught to expect the aircraft to remain whole. It would float for somewhere between 15 and 45 minutes, as I recall (but don't quote that. Look it up if you want to know more.). After which it would sink, and once it went submerged, it could go down fast.

If there was no cabin breach, then what would we see? Nothing. Which also would mean nobody got out after the plane went down at sea. If they popped the doors after coming down, there would be some debris. Perhaps only seat cushions and some luggage, but something.

The reason I came here today though, was to point out something that has changed - or I didn't get it quite right. Apparently the black boxes aboard flight 370 had locator beacons attached.

If they are like the locator beacons used when I was working - they may never have gotten activated. They have to be immersed in water, or manually activated, I think. But, fwiw:

. . .It will take the ship, the Ocean Shield, three days just to get to the search zone, leaving precious little time to locate the plane's flight data recorders before the batteries on its locator beacon run out. The batteries are designed to last 30 days; the plane has been missing 23 days.

Under favorable sea conditions, the pingers can be heard 2 nautical miles away. But high seas, background noise, wreckage or silt can all make pingers harder to detect. . .

I also recall the emergency beacons having a greater range - but that could be my memory. So I did a quick look about, and found this, for more info on the beacons.
http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/emerbcns.html

My guess, given what we are hearing, is that flight 370 black boxes were attached to the older type with limited range. On top of that, if they went down at sea - if the beacons were attached to the black boxes, they probably would not be floating, as the emergency beacons associated with flotation rafts are designed to.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

That's an interesting question regarding floating debris. There are two flights I can think of that hit somewhat nose first, at high speed, into the water. Swissair 111 and Alaska Air 261.

The Swissair flight was in a cove, and left a lot of debris that floated in the surface and to shore even. It's impact was at a slight angle, but the force such that it broke up into well over 1 million pieces.

For the Alaskan flight, here is an aerial photo of the area where boats were looking for debris, this was just hours after the flight went down. The caption and other similar photos say there is debris that boats are collecting. But I'll be darned if I can see anything.

Virtually nothing. However, this link shows an oil slick (jet fuel) that is easy to spot.

However, those were taken hours after the accident, and investigators knew exactly where to look. Plus, the seas were calm.

How much of an oil/fuel slick would a virtually empty MH570 leave?

Just for reference, Egypt Air 990 didn't hit nose first, but rather stalled into the sea and left fair amount of floating debris, as did Air France 447, and much of it's vertical stabilizer (tail) was in tact. Birgenair Flight 301 stalled and inverted before crashing into the ocean and left little debris. Adam Air 574 broke went nose first at very high speed, but partly broke up a few thousand feet before impact. It took many days to find it in rough seas and left very little floating debris, if any.

 

[hiero2]

If the flight flew 'till empty - not much oil slick. Engine oil, hydraulic fluid would be all that was left.

Egypt Air 990 is not a good example of a flight landing at a more or less normal attitude. It likely was descending at a very high rate of speed when it impacted - indicating a likelihood of extreme nose down or tail down attitude. From the NTSB report "data indicate . . . average rate of descent during the second dive of about 20,000 fpm." (NTSB/AAB-02/01, page 39). At that rate of descent, the airspeed would be sufficient to counter the lack of engine propulsion, and a glide path could have been assumed.

Ditto Air France 447. Also not a normal attitude approach - and a very high descent rate. I'm pretty sure that rate of descent would have meant the aircraft would likely break up if it was an attempted landing on ground. Any pilots out there?

The flight data recordings stopped at 02:14:28 UTC, or 3 hours 45 minutes after takeoff. At that point, the aircraft's ground speed was 107 knots, and it was descending at 10,912 feet per minute. Its pitch was 16.2 degrees (nose up), with a roll angle of 5.3 degrees left. During its descent, the aircraft had turned more than 180 degrees to the right to a compass heading of 270 degrees. The aircraft remained stalled during its entire 3 minute 30 second descent from 38,000 feet[30] before it hit the ocean surface at a speed of 151 knots (280 km/h), comprising vertical and horizontal components of both 107 knots. The aircraft broke up on impact; everyone on board died, presumably instantaneously.[31]

So far, I'm standing by my thinking that it would be more likely for the aircraft to remain in one piece in this instance. If it was in stable but unmanned flight and ran out of fuel, we'd need someone experienced in the aircraft to verify, but I would not be surprised that it would assume a stable glide path at that time. If it was still manned, then presumably whomever was still alive would be trying to bring the aircraft down successfully, rather than catastrophically. If they wanted to crash it, that would have happened earlier - no point in waiting so long.

Idk about the other instances you point out - and I'm out of time atm.

C ya.

Btw - the internet can be wonderful. Reports like the NTSB report referenced above were hard to get when I was working in that business. Oh, we had copies in the flight rooms - but the public had to go to Washington to get copies, I think. And I'm not sure if they were publicly even available. Now it's easy.

 

[Amsterhammer]

The only way they're going to find the wreck, if they ever do, is by a blinding stroke of luck approaching miracle status. It will require a similar act of God for them to even find any debris, since it is evident by now that they don't have the slightest idea where to look. Very depressing.

 

[hiero2]

The only way they're going to find the wreck, if they ever do, is by a blinding stroke of luck approaching miracle status. It will require a similar act of God for them to even find any debris, since it is evident by now that they don't have the slightest idea where to look. Very depressing.

Agree. And given that it has apparently successfully done a Seigfried and Roy / Bermuda Triangle act, I have to think the only reasonable explanation is nefarious intent. And unsuccessful. The only way it could have been nefarious and successful was to land somewhere and preserve the aircraft. But for what purpose? KISS principle says all those scenarios are way overly complicated.

It would make a good story, though - CIA agent Black Bart, so deep undercover he's not even on the mole list, gets 'disappeared' by his own boss, for supervillian-like purposes. Taking out the aircraft with him. Unless you are into "Lost" - then maybe a time/space warp story.

You know what question I have though? The pingers. Supposedly, if the emergency beacons WORK, you can pick up the signal THOUSANDS of miles away. Why do the beacons attached to the flight recorders have such a supposedly limited range? Next, what possible scenarios could you get where the beacons did NOT get self-activated? [I can tell you one - they never went down at sea.] But if they went down on land, what about cell phones? Although, the cell phone thing is fairly easy to explain away.

Dollars to donuts, this will change the way that flight recorders and flight data are specced and managed.