Intermezzo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 10,623
- Reaction score
- 1,678
Thanks... I realize that, even if those in the article mentioned agree now (not sure if they do) are those you mention using all the data from the start, when the plan took off through to the big turn south? Probably my lack of knowledge, but it the entire trip that doesn't seem to be explained not just the southern arc?
I'm probably the only person here who is still not buying these claims:
1. the captain did it
2. all the passengers were knocked out (that I can buy)
3. it flew on autopilot for most of the journey
What I might be able to buy is that the captain had a gun at his head and somehow was able to over power that person and set an autopilot course onto the Southern arc before passing out/dying himself because he knew the plane had to crash somewhere and there was nothing else he could do in the time left... IDK. A suicide/homicide mission makes absolutely NO sense to me. And, I still have other questions, but oh well.
I think the search team, in releasing the Definition of Underwater Search Area report, is trying not to overstep into the investigative side of this case, which lies in the hands of the Malaysians, as they try to come up with assumptions to define the search zones in the southern arc.
I haven't read that the independent scientists debated the first turn, the flying back over Malaysia or the turn north along the Strait of Malacca. but I could be wrong and may head over to the Duncan Steel site again for a refresher.
I believe (but could be mistaken) the independent scientists focused only on the Inmarsat data that was released not long ago and which final path the plane took, the northern route or the southern.