Malaysia airlines MH370 with 239 people on board, 8 March 2014 #26

[Cliff Hardy]

Hard to believe how much time has passed. The experts seem confident this was a deliberate act but stop short of naming anyone. .

The 'experts' have so many different theories on this it makes me dizzy.

 

[Bats]

For what it's worth... JMO

If this was a deliberate act (i don't think it was), the only threat to the plan were others on the aircraft.

Other than that, i can't think of a reason the person flying the aircraft, needed to avoid detection. Anyone planning such an act would have known there was no need to avoid detection. They could have live streamed the event and it wouldn't have made any difference.

 

[IceIce9]

MOO....
1. Suicide - No
Depressed suicidal people don't 'normally' involve so many other unknown people in their suicide.

2. Murder/suicide - No
If someone was planning an extremely detailed and difficult way to kill so many people and themselves, right at the very top of the checklist when planning such an event would be to make sure people know why you did it.

I believe there was an explosion in the front of the aircraft in the cargo. It was enough to puncture a hole in the aircraft which caused it to momentarily loose control. There were lots of alarms going off in the cockpit and along with perhaps a fire and smoke, there was a major decompression. Perhaps one pilot began operating an extinguisher.

The pilot at the controls managed to gain some control and put the aircraft in a turn to head back to the nearest airport.

All this took around 1 minute and hypoxia had set in. The pilot after completing the turn and regaining some control, prioritised working out what had happened over a rapid decent and by this time it was already too late.

The crew and passengers may have had oxygen for a little while but without the rapid decent also would surcom to hypoxia.

Knowing how planes work, if it had been roughly manually trimmed after the turn, it most probably just kept flying. If the engines where running, the motion of the plane would be a rocking motion. Up and down and side to side, over a distance, relatively straight or an arc but would sometimes turn a little depending on the rocking and the wind.

To me, the turns (after the first turnaround) look normal for a plane that is flying itself. That is, just the wind and the natural rocking that alters the direction. Exactly how an aircraft behaves under power but without flaps, ailerons or rudder being applied...

Side note:
A good percentage of people who use Microsoft Flight Simulator, are actually pilots!

The pilot saying "Good night, MH370" is not something suspicious in pilot radio language.

Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 1771 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

All 43 passengers and crew aboard the plane died, five of whom, including the two pilots, were presumably shot dead before the plane crashed. The perpetrator, David Burke, was a disgruntled former employee of USAir, the parent company of Pacific Southwest Airlines.

The crash was the second-worst mass murder in Californian history

 

[Warwick1991]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (US FBI) was invited by the Malaysian government to assist them with examining Microsoft flight simulation software used by the pilot in a home flight simulator. Their investigation found that the simulator was used for a flight path similar to the one that occurred. https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/asia/mh370-pilot-simulation/index.html. That flight path was not on any established route, and was a flight to nowhere.

The pilot has always been a suspect; his motive is uncertain. At this point, although locating the wreckage of the aircraft may give families some answers, the flight data recorder and the cockpit data recorder may not yield data. It is possible that they might yield data if found and recovered, but after a decade at such a great depth and after massive impacts, there's a likelihood that they would yield nothing.

 

[Panniniclaus]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (US FBI) was invited by the Malaysian government to assist them with examining Microsoft flight simulation software used by the pilot in a home flight simulator. Their investigation found that the simulator was used for a flight path similar to the one that occurred. https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/asia/mh370-pilot-simulation/index.html. That flight path was not on any established route, and was a flight to nowhere.

The pilot has always been a suspect; his motive is uncertain. At this point, although locating the wreckage of the aircraft may give families some answers, the flight data recorder and the cockpit data recorder may not yield data. It is possible that they might yield data if found and recovered, but after a decade at such a great depth and after massive impacts, there's a likelihood that they would yield nothing.

The simulator the pilot used was similar to the path the actual flight took, a flight to nowhere. If you are still not believing this was a deliberate act, you may have ulterior motives. This is on top of other evidence around the transponder etc.

 

[Charlot123]

For what it's worth... JMO

If this was a deliberate act (i don't think it was), the only threat to the plan were others on the aircraft.

Other than that, i can't think of a reason the person flying the aircraft, needed to avoid detection. Anyone planning such an act would have known there was no need to avoid detection. They could have live streamed the event and it wouldn't have made any difference.

Funny, I was just remembering today our flight from Malaysia to Bangkok, and that “economy flights” in Asia are super cheap, but you feel like in a school bus.

First - two days later, on many forums, the name of Shah was already mentioned. At that time, it was more plain: no drinking and pursuing of hot flight attendants was even discussed. He was a friend of Anwar Ibrahim, they said, and he had a nonexistent marriage. His act was a protest against incarceration of Ibrahim. You have to understand, now Ibrahim's party is in power, and he probably only half-delivered, but in 2014, the ruling party was despised, and Ibrahim's party was viewed as the only hope for liberals. So, this.

But it is Malaysia, where the laws and punishment for many crimes are exceptionally strict. I think that Z. Ahmad Shah had a valid reason to be concerned about the future of his family if he were, immediately, linked to the crime. So he wanted to protest, but never be directly linked to the case. Which is exactly what happened.

His family is untouched. Ibrahim is at power. Case will never be solved. We have no proof that Shah did it.

It is another example of a terrorist's mind. Everyone mentions Shah as probably not super stable, but a talented pilot. It would be interesting to learn about his personality. Did he, before the flight, also tremble and cry, but said, "hard as it is, but it needs to be done"? Was he angry?

Let us talk about the passengers. Most were from China. I often think about them and their families. I hope they slept and were not scared.

This, too. The relationships between different countries in these parts of Asia are complicated. I wonder what other routes Shah knew well. I ask myself could it happen en route to Singapore or Bangkok and think, no, and the reason is not only geography.

So there is one unfair part in the story. I think the human tragedy of 239 people is almost lost behind, "where is the plane?" and "how did he do it"? Think of it. These people 100% trusted Shah. And he planned. Morally, it is as bad as killing a child. Someone who won't survive without you.

 

[Bats]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (US FBI) was invited by the Malaysian government to assist them with examining Microsoft flight simulation software used by the pilot in a home flight simulator. Their investigation found that the simulator was used for a flight path similar to the one that occurred. https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/asia/mh370-pilot-simulation/index.html. That flight path was not on any established route, and was a flight to nowhere.

The pilot has always been a suspect; his motive is uncertain. At this point, although locating the wreckage of the aircraft may give families some answers, the flight data recorder and the cockpit data recorder may not yield data. It is possible that they might yield data if found and recovered, but after a decade at such a great depth and after massive impacts, there's a likelihood that they would yield nothing.

As a user of Microsoft Flight Simulator for about 15 years, I saw his set up and can tell you he had probably been using it for many years too. He was obviously a fan of MS Flight simulator with the set up he had.

I must have logged thousands of flights over that time and flew around the world several times. Many flights were to nowhere in particular. I had probably flown a similar flight path to MH370 myself.

I'd love to see the flight they are talking about.

What plane was he flying? Was it a Lockhead SR-71 blackbird or was it a Cessna Citation? Or was it exactly the same model 777 with adjusted flight characteristics? Same fuel? Same cargo? Was the flight crash landed in the Indian Ocean or was it just on the way to Johannesburg but stopped the simulator for a cup of tea?

Also, were there others on the doomed flight that had also used Microsoft flight simulator?

The talk around the use of MS flight simulator is all pure speculation that amounts to nothing in my opinion.

 

[Charlot123]

As a user of Microsoft Flight Simulator for about 15 years, I saw his set up and can tell you he had probably been using it for many years too. He was obviously a fan of MS Flight simulator with the set up he had.

I must have logged thousands of flights over that time and flew around the world several times. Many flights were to nowhere in particular. I had probably flown a similar flight path to MH370 myself.

I'd love to see the flight they are talking about.

What plane was he flying? Was it a Lockhead SR-71 blackbird or was it a Cessna Citation? Or was it exactly the same model 777 with adjusted flight characteristics? Same fuel? Same cargo? Was the flight crash landed in the Indian Ocean or was it just on the way to Johannesburg but stopped the simulator for a cup of tea?

Also, were there others on the doomed flight that had also used Microsoft flight simulator?

The talk around the use of MS flight simulator is all pure speculation that amounts to nothing in my opinion.

But disappearing after a “final handshake” with Malaysian ATC and never saying “hello” to Vietnam? That had to be planned. Manually switching off transponders? Flying in such a way that you are undetected by old towers?
That someone did is - is obvious. I agree that a stimulator may be the least obvious proof. I like true crime and I am not a killer by nature. Yet after each case, I Google. My Google searches are not a proof of either crime or planning one. For a pilot to fly on a simulator, trying different routes, is normal.
But for a pilot, to be seen leaving the Ibrahim’s trial on March 7, to fly out early on March 8, would be a possible cause?

There is always a possibility of it being the 2nd pilot, too. He is considered to be less experienced. I think that enough simulator flights could work for him, too. One thing: you have to fly this route, from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing many times, to know about certain peculiarities. For example, Vietnamese ATC comes across as… not too organized? Distracted? In this story. You have to know it about them. Any other pilot flying from any other point above Penang peninsula to Beijing would know it, too, but there are very few countries with potentially similar route - Indonesia? South of Thailand? were there pilots from these countries on board? A Chinese pilot making a similar flight from Beijing to Kuala Lumpur would know it, but I am unaware of Chinese pilots on board. Plus, Shah said good-bye and then the transponder was off.

 

[Bats]

But disappearing after a “final handshake” with Malaysian ATC and never saying “hello” to Vietnam? That had to be planned.

Not necessarily. You are just assuming it was planned.

Manually switching off transponders? Flying in such a way that you are undetected by old towers?

Where is the evidence that the transponder was manually turned off? I'd like to see that. I've read that someone may have turned off the transponder to buy a bit of time. Time for what though? There is no way that by turning off the transponder a hijacker could expect to fly undetected to somewhere in the Indian Ocean. Let's be clear, the response was horrible and ordinarily the plane should have been detected flying in a different direction fairly quickly.

I would highly doubt if someone (pilot or anyone else), planned to hijack the plane that they would expect to be undetected for so long. In planning this they may have been able to buy an hour or two at the very most. But what for? There is no reason to buy an hour or two that i can see.

That someone did is - is obvious.

Nope, I disagree. A catastrophic event hasn't been ruled out as far as I'm aware.

I agree that a stimulator may be the least obvious proof. I like true crime and I am not a killer by nature. Yet after each case, I Google. My Google searches are not a proof of either crime or planning one. For a pilot to fly on a simulator, trying different routes, is normal.
But for a pilot, to be seen leaving the Ibrahim’s trial on March 7, to fly out early on March 8, would be a possible cause?

There may be other people on the plane that you could fit a narrative to.....But really, that is just speculating in the end, isn't it?

 

[tezi]

I think it has been established that the transponder was manually turned off, but who did it?

 

[Charlot123]

Not necessarily. You are just assuming it was planned.

Where is the evidence that the transponder was manually turned off? I'd like to see that. I've read that someone may have turned off the transponder to buy a bit of time. Time for what though? There is no way that by turning off the transponder a hijacker could expect to fly undetected to somewhere in the Indian Ocean. Let's be clear, the response was horrible and ordinarily the plane should have been detected flying in a different direction fairly quickly.

I would highly doubt if someone (pilot or anyone else), planned to hijack the plane that they would expect to be undetected for so long. In planning this they may have been able to buy an hour or two at the very most. But what for? There is no reason to buy an hour or two that i can see.


Nope, I disagree. A catastrophic event hasn't been ruled out as far as I'm aware.

There may be other people on the plane that you could fit a narrative to.....But really, that is just speculating in the end, isn't it?

I hope that posting a link to a good YouTube video is OK.

This was the best for me. It says how they detected that the transponder was manually switched off. As well as some things about the cabin.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Surely we are speculating. Until enough pieces, and a black box are found, anyone is. But given the slim chance to find them, I think it will be a mystery.

That the transponder was manually switched off is the first bit of information published. Way before they looked into the simulator. That came from the first committee to investigate the issue.

That the locals published “it was Shah” almost immediately was also the fact. Have you been to Malaysia? To me, they looked young, very humorous and curious. They are passionate about their politics and always have been. An interesting country. But they seem to be the people to gossip, and what I read was along, “here is what we think”, and then a lot about Shah.

Now, everyone is in his right to publish alternative versions. I think finding an aileron ruled out conspiracy versions about it being hijacked, thank god. A version about an accident would not explain switching off the transponder.

Could it be someone else inside the plane? Potentially, yes. Logically, way less likely. But if you have your own version, it will definitely bring in a new fresh insight into a story that now sounds like a constant memorial prayer.

 

[Warwick1991]

The simulator the pilot used was similar to the path the actual flight took, a flight to nowhere. If you are still not believing this was a deliberate act, you may have ulterior motives. This is on top of other evidence around the transponder etc.

I don't have any ulterior motives. I do in fact think it was a deliberate act, and my post was in support of that scenario.

 

[SouthAussie]

A catastrophic event hasn't been ruled out as far as I'm aware.

I agree that a catastrophic event hasn't been ruled out.
As one example only .... there could have been a cockpit fire that caused the transponder to shut down. Just because the little debris they have found doesn't show burning, they haven't yet found enough of the plane to rule that out.

imo

In an earlier incident involving a Boeing 777, on 29 July 2011, EgyptAir Flight 667 suffered an intense oxygen-fed cockpit fire while still on the ground which destroyed the flight controls, the instruments and burnt a hole through the hull of the aircraft. Link

 

[SouthAussie]

I have aways wondered if these two separate accounts weren't MH370 what plane was it?


Katherine Tee was sailing across the Indian Ocean from India to Phuket with her husband when she saw what appeared to be a passenger jet on fire in the night sky. Link

“I am on the oil ring Songa-Mercur off the coast of Vung Tau.
“The surface location of the observation is Lat 08 22’ 30.20” N Lat 108 42.22.26” E.
“I observed (the plane?) burning at high altitude at a compass bearing of 265* to 275*”
“From when I first saw the burning (plane) until the flames went out (still at high altitude) was 10-15 seconds. There was no lateral movement, so it was either coming toward our location, stationary, or going away from our location,” he wrote. Link

 

[Bats]

I hope that posting a link to a good YouTube video is OK.

This was the best for me. It says how they detected that the transponder was manually switched off. As well as some things about the cabin.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Surely we are speculating. Until enough pieces, and a black box are found, anyone is. But given the slim chance to find them, I think it will be a mystery.

That the transponder was manually switched off is the first bit of information published. Way before they looked into the simulator. That came from the first committee to investigate the issue.

That the locals published “it was Shah” almost immediately was also the fact. Have you been to Malaysia? To me, they looked young, very humorous and curious. They are passionate about their politics and always have been. An interesting country. But they seem to be the people to gossip, and what I read was along, “here is what we think”, and then a lot about Shah.

Now, everyone is in his right to publish alternative versions. I think finding an aileron ruled out conspiracy versions about it being hijacked, thank god. A version about an accident would not explain switching off the transponder.

Could it be someone else inside the plane? Potentially, yes. Logically, way less likely. But if you have your own version, it will definitely bring in a new fresh insight into a story that now sounds like a constant memorial prayer.

I have watched the YouTube video you shared a link to.

The big problem i have is that the whole documentary (if you could call it that), was made to show that the plane's disappearance, was a plan of Zaharie.

Another problem i have is that it mixes facts with fiction! A bit like watching a movie that is "based on a true story".

Right from the start when it says that the pilot, Zaharie, asked Fariq, the co-pilot, to get a coffee, it is mixing up fact with fiction. There is no evidence at all that this took place yet it continues the story until poor Fariq dies in the corridor.
All completely fictional!

With regard to the transponder, it really doesn't say if it being switched off could have happened another way other than the pilot switching it off.

I am trying my best to not get "tunnel vision" whilst there are still several possibilities on the table.

 

[Bats]

I agree that a catastrophic event hasn't been ruled out.
As one example only .... there could have been a cockpit fire that caused the transponder to shut down. Just because the little debris they have found doesn't show burning, they haven't yet found enough of the plane to rule that out.

imo

In an earlier incident involving a Boeing 777, on 29 July 2011, EgyptAir Flight 667 suffered an intense oxygen-fed cockpit fire while still on the ground which destroyed the flight controls, the instruments and burnt a hole through the hull of the aircraft. Link

Thanks @SouthAussie. That's very interesting about flight 667!

I have aways wondered if these two separate accounts weren't MH370 what plane was it?


Katherine Tee was sailing across the Indian Ocean from India to Phuket with her husband when she saw what appeared to be a passenger jet on fire in the night sky. Link

“I am on the oil ring Songa-Mercur off the coast of Vung Tau.
“The surface location of the observation is Lat 08 22’ 30.20” N Lat 108 42.22.26” E.
“I observed (the plane?) burning at high altitude at a compass bearing of 265* to 275*”
“From when I first saw the burning (plane) until the flames went out (still at high altitude) was 10-15 seconds. There was no lateral movement, so it was either coming toward our location, stationary, or going away from our location,” he wrote. Link

Yes, I've always wondered about those possible eyewitness accounts too! They seem very specific!

If you thought you saw a passenger jet on fire, I'd say you probably did see a passenger jet on fire!

 

[SouthAussie]

Thanks @SouthAussie. That's very interesting about flight 667!




Yes, I've always wondered about those possible eyewitness accounts too! They seem very specific!

If you thought you saw a passenger jet on fire, I'd say you probably did see a passenger jet on fire!

I have always been a bit wary about perhaps erroneously placing the blame on the captain or co-pilot. Not only because of these eye witness sightings of a burning plane, and other possible causes for the crash, but also because ....

Investigators have said there was nothing suspicious in the background, financial affairs, training and mental health of both the captain and co-pilot. (as per the previous ABC link)


And the one entity with a horse in this race is the Malaysian Government. They entirely own Malaysia Airlines. They will likely be found liable for multiple large lawsuits if their plane was at fault. And the airlines will suffer a financial loss of any good reputation.

As it is, they paid out about 100 families (($349,000–$418,000) - there were 239 people onboard - but some refused this payment because the payout agreement specified that Malaysia had no obligation to continue the search. Link

MAB is owned entirely by the Malaysian Government, through sovereign wealth fund, Khazanah Nasional. Link
.

 

[Bats]

I have always been a bit wary about perhaps erroneously placing the blame on the captain or co-pilot.

Yes, me too!

And the one entity with a horse in this race is the Malaysian Government. They entirely own Malaysia Airlines. They will likely be found liable for multiple large lawsuits if their plane was at fault. And the airlines will suffer a financial loss of any good reputation.

As it is, they paid out about 100 families (($349,000–$418,000) - there were 239 people onboard - but some refused this payment because the payout agreement specified that Malaysia had no obligation to continue the search. Link

MAB is owned entirely by the Malaysian Government, through sovereign wealth fund, Khazanah Nasional. Link
.

Hmmmmm.....that's interesting!

 

[Charlot123]

I have watched the YouTube video you shared a link to.

The big problem i have is that the whole documentary (if you could call it that), was made to show that the plane's disappearance, was a plan of Zaharie.

Another problem i have is that it mixes facts with fiction! A bit like watching a movie that is "based on a true story".

Right from the start when it says that the pilot, Zaharie, asked Fariq, the co-pilot, to get a coffee, it is mixing up fact with fiction. There is no evidence at all that this took place yet it continues the story until poor Fariq dies in the corridor.
All completely fictional!

With regard to the transponder, it really doesn't say if it being switched off could have happened another way other than the pilot switching it off.

I am trying my best to not get "tunnel vision" whilst there are still several possibilities on the table.

If i remember, it was in this video, but maybe somewhere else. Didn't the knob have four positions, one of them "ground speed zero", and when the knob was manually turned off, this position was fixated at one of the control towers? Meaning, it was turned manually?

But, @Bats, the video was called "what Netflix got wrong." I mean, after Netflix makes a movie, and we have no clue what has happened, another movie, explaining why it couldn't be "the Netflix way", is appropriate, methinks.

However, as i have offered, if you have a different version, it would be more than interesting to read to it. Every year we are further and further from that tragedy, and there is not even a graveyard for the passengers and the crew; it would be great to read another version.

 

[Bats]

If i remember, it was in this video, but maybe somewhere else. Didn't the knob have four positions, one of them "ground speed zero", and when the knob was manually turned off, this position was fixated at one of the control towers? Meaning, it was turned manually?

But, @Bats, the video was called "what Netflix got wrong." I mean, after Netflix makes a movie, and we have no clue what has happened, another movie, explaining why it couldn't be "the Netflix way", is appropriate, methinks.

However, as i have offered, if you have a different version, it would be more than interesting to read to it. Every year we are further and further from that tragedy, and there is not even a graveyard for the passengers and the crew; it would be great to read another version.

Yes, it explained that for a split second the plane's position was showing on radar without it's altitude. Their conclusion being it "must" have been manually tuned off because on the way to turning the transponder knob to "STBY", it clicked through another setting "ALT RPTG OFF", that shows position without altitude.

My understanding is that radar showing no altitude for a split second, "may" be caused by the transponder being manually turned off, not "must".

I have my opinion on what happened which I shared a few posts ago. Its just my opinion for what it's worth...