Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #16

[jilly]

To me it means that they have more information than what they are reporting.

Not to me. It's a Malaysian source.

 

[Hatfield]

To me it means that they have more information than what they are reporting.

If after all the hard work of other countries they do finally get the black box I hope they are able to get the readings off of it before giving it back to Malaysia. I just dont trust Malaysia to tell us what was on it if it makes them look bad. Or worse yet lie to everyone what was on it.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

If after all the hard work of other countries they do finally get the black box I hope they are able to get the readings off of it before giving it back to Malaysia. I just dont trust Malaysia to tell us what was on it if it makes them look bad. Or worse yet lie to everyone what was on it.

It will be Malaysia's investigation will it not?

 

[ElleElle]

Was it reported that the transponders were turned off by human hand? I'm not sure but it seems like this is what was reported.

If so, this would have to be explained by the mechanical failure theory, imo.

Good point! See? Every time I think I have it figured, a curve ball is thrown. :banghead:

Could the transponder have been switched off by accident trying to put out a fire?

 

[Montjoy]

This isn't really on point for flight 370, but the final report on a crash in the Canadian arctic was just released this week. Here's the link --
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north...lot-s-warnings-before-nunavut-crash-1.2584641

A brief summary suggests that a number of dark stars aligned for this to happen:

"Canada’s Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday that First Air Flight 6560 was doomed by a variety of factors, including a scrambling cockpit crew that started their descent late into the Resolute airport in Nunavut and a captain who might have accidentally hit his steering yoke and inadvertently changed the mode on the autopilot."

There is also a fairly haunting animation of the consequential moments leading up to the fatal crash (put together by the Transportation Safety Board):

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/videos/aviation/a11h0002/index.asp

Forgive me if this has all been linked before, but it's on my mind as I know people in and affected by the crash, and it's a good example of how, across the thousands of flights that take place every day, sometimes a number of human and technical issues culminate in tragedy.

 

[Brightbird]

What bugs me though, is the Malaysian PM said in his press conference, this was "deliberate action".

WTH does that mean??

Imo, "deliberate action" such a vague and misleading phrase in this context. Of course, with all the theories of hijacking or suicide flying around it's easy to interpret is as nefarious. But if there was a fire or mechanical problem, "deliberate action" could be the pilots switching off the electricals to contain the fire and/or turning the plane around for and emergency landing. It's unlikely the plane grew a brain and decided to turn around totally independent of a pilot. Ipso facto, it was deliberate action.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

So true Brightbird ..

 

[Holly G. Lightly]

This "unofficial" transcript takes a minute to load, look forward to any observations.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...l-54-minutes-of-communication-from-MH370.html

I would love to hear any observations, especially from pilots.

(see my post a few back…)

 

[ElleElle]

It could have been "deliberate" if this was a hypoxia event and the pilot and/or co-pilot made a conscious decision to turn the plane then set the auto-pilot to the waypoints taking it out to sea to avoid killing people on land. During the course of doing this..the transponder/ACARS could have been switched off due to completely innocent reasons.

Of course, this would make one of both of them heroes and it doesn't appear to be where this is heading.

BBM ~ If you have hypoxia, is it possible your decisions are not sound before the unconscious state?

Also, if there was danger, wouldn't you declare an emergency and head to the nearest airport?

 

[jilly]

It could have been "deliberate" if this was a hypoxia event and the pilot and/or co-pilot made a conscious decision to turn the plane then set the auto-pilot to the waypoints taking it out to sea to avoid killing people on land. During the course of doing this..the transponder/ACARS could have been switched off due to completely innocent reasons.

Of course, this would make one of both of them heroes and it doesn't appear to be where this is heading.

Exactly and I believe the word "deliberate" is 'deliberate' on their part to end this which they've been trying to do for 2 wks. I mean, look at the other day, when everyone is risking their lives to find debris and the Malaysians come out and say the planes in the ocean and everyone's dead. They need to hire a PR company or something.

I'm still going with the mechanical catastrophe and that the pilots did everything in their power to firstly get to that airport which deals with maintenance and failed.

 

[Momoffourboys]

Good point! See? Every time I think I have it figured, a curve ball is thrown. :banghead:

Could the transponder have been switched off by accident trying to put out a fire?

March 15
Satellite data shows the plane flew for seven hours after communications equipment was turned off, possibly towards Iran or south-west to the Indian Ocean.
Police raid homes of pilots Zaharie Ahmad Shah and Fariq Abdul Hamid.
March 16
Media reports a British-born al-Qaeda supergrass claims a handful of Malaysian men were planning a shoe bombing on the MH370.
Malaysia Airlines reveals plane’s communications were deliberately turned off.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370--timeline-to-tragedy-20140325-hvmle.html#ixzz2x7Wt2eyd

 

[Hatfield]

If it was a hijacking of some sort and Malaysia officials were called , maybe they sent some jets up to try to force the plane to land and that could be why the plane flew south over the ocean. He could have had jets surrounding him.

You would think the radar would have picked up other blips for the jets though if that was the case.

 

[RR0004]

I used to think it was intentionally disabled, but now....I don't think so.
Communications could have been knocked out by any sort of mechanical failure.

But wouldn't ground controllers know that? Aren't signals sent that something is malunctioning? I know all about the transponder, but wouldn't the communication system still work?

 

[RR0004]

March 15
Satellite data shows the plane flew for seven hours after communications equipment was turned off, possibly towards Iran or south-west to the Indian Ocean.
Police raid homes of pilots Zaharie Ahmad Shah and Fariq Abdul Hamid.
March 16
Media reports a British-born al-Qaeda supergrass claims a handful of Malaysian men were planning a shoe bombing on the MH370.
Malaysia Airlines reveals plane’s communications were deliberately turned off.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370--timeline-to-tragedy-20140325-hvmle.html#ixzz2x7Wt2eyd

Ok, now I see...

 

[LambChop]

We do know the engines were running and the plane did turn so not sure to what extent there would be mechanical problems.

As far as the pilot. It is reported that he was distantly related to Anwar and had been to the trial that morning. Malaysians seem as if they are very proud people so I do not see that the pilot would have benefited by taking over the plane because it could bring disgrace for Anwar. And I don't think he would want to do that, ever. He could have taken a private plane up and crashed into the ocean if that were his intentions. I don't see him putting all those lives in any danger.

The co-pilot is new. This was his first flight without a monitor hanging over his shoulder. Maybe he was nervous. Maybe the pilot said we are cruising along, take over and I'll be right back. Did he turn off the systems he should not have, he could have? Could he have noticed that the APC was off, thought there was a problem and immediately turned the plane left to go back while the Capt. was out of the cockpit. He could have. For all we know when the plane was turned those batteries might have broken loose. There may have been more batteries than has been reported and it started a fire.

To me batteries in such a high quantity do not belong on a plane, ever. It bothers me that it was initially reported that cargo was not scanned because the scanner was broken. The climb to 43,000/45,000 could have been an attempt to put the fire out. There is still the person on the oil rig who claims he saw the plane on fire one minute and the fire out the next, I believe.

There is a lot of information we do know. It's just a process of elimination. What sounds logically. I don't think the two Iranian's were involved because something would have turned up by now and we have heard nothing. They just wanted their freedom, so sad that they were that close.

jmo

 

[Momoffourboys]

RMAF assumed MH370 turn back was normal
Leven Woon | March 26, 2014
We thought the aircraft was non-hostile, we assumed it was a directive of the control tower that had directed the plane to turn back, says deputy defence minister.

In revealing this today, Deputy Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Bakri said the air force decided to ignore the radar signal because the aircraft was categorised as non-hostile in nature.
“We thought the aircraft was non-hostile, we assumed it was a directive of the control tower that had directed the plane to turn back,” he told the Dewan Rakyat today.


http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/ca...air-force-assumed-mh370-turn-back-was-normal/

 

[Prosecution_Rests]

See, and I disagree with this. I think a “mechanical failure” explanation leaves the Malaysian gov’t open to liability through either faulty upkeep or oversight as owner of the airline, kwim?

I would think (no legal experience whatsoever) that a explanation of pilot action would limit their liability and also paint them as “soft” victims, because after 30 years, how could they ever have predicted that?

This is a good angle and point. I could see Malaysia sharing some of the responsibility financially but Boeing would probably be the larger target. Plus it gives us another entity to talk about IF this is mechanical failure but good point.

 

[Hatfield]

It will be Malaysia's investigation will it not?

I would hope the other governments who are shelling out all the money to help them search would at least have made a deal that they would spend all this money so long as they get first crack at pulling readings off the box.

I am sure certain other countries (like China who is also helping with their ship) dont trust Malaysia for being honest either.

 

[ElleElle]

If I am not mistaken, this is information that Boeing released to officials that later made its way down to the news outlets.

I think they said that they know it was disabled by hand due to something being actually entered in order to disable it.

I am under the impression that Boeing may have information that the transponders were disabled and power was still going and other systems were fine.

I am not really sure about this but I am almost positive that this is what is still on the table because this information did not come from Malaysia but from Boeing.

BBM ~ Yes, I believe they said the "code" had to be manually entered in to disable.

Here I go, back to square 1. :facepalm:

 

[costalpilot]

4. I'm not going all the way back through this thread to find it, but there was a recent post-in this thread which stated his normal signout was "Copy that", not "allright goodnight".

You dont need to find a post that wrongly states that the FO's "normal signout was ' copy that. Not ' alright goodnight.'". The fact that <modsnip> anyone would assert that only shows they are not familier with aviation phraselogy, or, if you will, pilot talk. NOONE signs off with "copy that." EVER.

"Allright, goodnight" is said at times at changeover points. Its not strictly kosher terminology, but its used every now and then. I used it myself, more than once, in that part of the world.