Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #1

[momrids6]

Oh for goodness sakes!

It probably sunk....

 

[Steely Dan]

Agreed. :blushing:

On a side note, the photo of the debris appears to be a window to me.

It looks like a seat cushion maybe?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Why? ...

Because the one singular "witness", the person they're claiming had the last contact with the downed airplane, requests to remain anonymous. That's ridic imo. And suspicious too.

 

[gregjrichards]

55 y old fisherman made a police report after sighting a jet flying "unusually and suspiciously low" that day #MH370 pic.twitter.com/vHNn7qEHvP
3:57am - 10 Mar 14

Twitter Samuel Chan

Just seen this on twitter I wonder if it is this plane and what it may mean. I hadn't read about this police report being made before.

 

[Karmady]

Because the one singular "witness", the person they're claiming had the last contact with the downed airplane, requests to remain anonymous. That's ridic imo. And suspicious too.

I'm pretty sure since he's the pilot of the plane who was asked to make contact, the people who need to know who he is, know who he is. Not wanting to identify himself to the media means nothing,imo. If they wanted to cover him up, they'd never have quoted him or would have made the story far more innocuous.

 

[Derryn Hunch]

Oh... one other relevant thing that I should mention here as potentially critical to anyone's "they landed it Hudson River style on the water intact" hopes and dreams...

And I am trying to appear busy here... so I am going to make it an entertaining but long winded explaination

There is something they're not telling you during those safety briefs before takeoff that you might not wanna know... look away now if thats you!

One of the design features that Airbus jets can be admired for over Boeing jets is the engine mount/sheer feature. Maybe Boeing have changed their tune in the design and implementation of the latest aircraft designs (747-9, 737 MAX and 787 series), but I am pretty damnsure the 777-200 series that this aircraft was from doesn't.

The problem is that the engines inlet cowlings of the Boeing aircraft designs actually hang slightly lower than the main fuselage. On top of this, they are secured to the wings with I think its 4 massive bolts of awesome that are of course designed to stop them from leaving the aircraft behind with the massive thrust and power they develop to make the plane fly

Now... the problem is, one of those huge big "scooops" is going to contact the water first. Usually tiny little wave top in even the calmest of oceans... or failing that, the last minute gust of wind that dips one wing just a few normally insignificant feet right at the moment you're about to show Captain Sully how its done.

Generally what happens is, the engine cowl that contacts first with the water goes on to demonstrate a rather poorly timed lesson in the differences in resistance between the air that the rest of the plane is still operating in - and that of the water that the engine has just made contact with.

Well, if you were in an Airbus at this point, with a bit of luck, the sheer pin does what its designed to do and sacrifices the engine to the water, tearing it off and allowing the pilot to continue showing off the best landing of his or her career.

But the Boeing will give in to the laws of Physics - to the detriment of the human bodies who have had just enough time to momentarily experience the joys of G-forces that at their lowest are only survivable for a few seconds at most, and at their highest will cause lethal damage to internal organs (just in case you don't break your neck hitting the dislocated row of seats that have torn off the floor in front of you and broken both legs to make your attempt to swim out of the rapidly sinking wreckage!). Then the the laws of Physics determine which part of the aircraft is going to take on the task of absorbing the energy of slowing the aircraft down from its relatively high minimum threshold speeds (the minimum speeds required to not drop out of the sky, yet be slow enough to be descending onto the runway when your in those final few seconds of the approach before wheels touch the earth again).

The rather boring fact that water is 750 times more dense than air suddenly becomes a fact you didn't need to know with a number you really dislike as the wing tears off and the fuselage breaks into three peices and sinks to the bottom of the dark inky waters of a moonless ocean that you've come down in while your tangled in your seat with the lady from Row 15C on your lap.

 

[HMSHood]

55 y old fisherman made a police report after sighting a jet flying "unusually and suspiciously low" that day #MH370 pic.twitter.com/vHNn7qEHvP
3:57am - 10 Mar 14

Twitter Samuel Chan

Just seen this on twitter I wonder if it is this plane and what it may mean. I hadn't read about this police report being made before.

First possible witness. I wonder if the fisherman made the police report right after he saw it. I would be interested in his location and time. Also, if he saw any fire and/or explosion. I wonder if more will come forward like oil platform workers and other fishermen.

 

[popsicle]

If this doesn't break your heart...

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/articles/5...a-plane-crash-pilot-daughter-tweets-viral.htm

I am reading her tweets as she "talks" to her dad.

It does break your heart, truly and yet there is a sense or feeling that she will be ok, her and her Mom. She is a total sweetheart too. imo

 

[Karmady]

Do not want to be profiling but that is interesting angle that I did know TY The thought kinda bugs me..........

I thought of him, too, after the other pilots comments about thinking it was the co-pilot doing the muffled talking and his age.

jmo

 

[Derryn Hunch]

There's the movie if you can't be bothered reading the book

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqKdVo_IcGs

 

[momrids6]

The United States extensively reviewed imagery taken by American spy satellites for evidence of a mid-air explosion, but saw none at all, an authoritative U.S. government source said. The source described U.S. satellite coverage of the region as thorough.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/10/us-malaysiaairlines-flight-idUSBREA2701720140310

 

[K_Z]

Oh... one other relevant thing that I should mention here as potentially critical to anyone's "they landed it Hudson River style on the water intact" hopes and dreams...

And I am trying to appear busy here... so I am going to make it an entertaining but long winded explaination

There is something they're not telling you during those safety briefs before takeoff that you might not wanna know... look away now if thats you!

One of the design features that Airbus jets can be admired for over Boeing jets is the engine mount/sheer feature. Maybe Boeing have changed their tune in the design and implementation of the latest aircraft designs (747-9, 737 MAX and 787 series), but I am pretty damnsure the 777-200 series that this aircraft was from doesn't.

The problem is that the engines inlet cowlings of the Boeing aircraft designs actually hang slightly lower than the main fuselage. On top of this, they are secured to the wings with I think its 4 massive bolts of awesome that are of course designed to stop them from leaving the aircraft behind with the massive thrust and power they develop to make the plane fly

Now... the problem is, one of those huge big "scooops" is going to contact the water first. Usually tiny little wave top in even the calmest of oceans... or failing that, the last minute gust of wind that dips one wing just a few normally insignificant feet right at the moment you're about to show Captain Sully how its done.

Generally what happens is, the engine cowl that contacts first with the water goes on to demonstrate a rather poorly timed lesson in the differences in resistance between the air that the rest of the plane is still operating in - and that of the water that the engine has just made contact with.

Well, if you were in an Airbus at this point, with a bit of luck, the sheer pin does what its designed to do and sacrifices the engine to the water, tearing it off and allowing the pilot to continue showing off the best landing of his or her career.

But the Boeing will give in to the laws of Physics - to the detriment of the human bodies who have had just enough time to momentarily experience the joys of G-forces that at their lowest are only survivable for a few seconds at most, and at their highest will cause lethal damage to internal organs (just in case you don't break your neck hitting the dislocated row of seats that have torn off the floor in front of you and broken both legs to make your attempt to swim out of the rapidly sinking wreckage!). Then the the laws of Physics determine which part of the aircraft is going to take on the task of absorbing the energy of slowing the aircraft down from its relatively high minimum threshold speeds (the minimum speeds required to not drop out of the sky, yet be slow enough to be descending onto the runway when your in those final few seconds of the approach before wheels touch the earth again).

The rather boring fact that water is 750 times more dense than air suddenly becomes a fact you didn't need to know with a number you really dislike as the wing tears off and the fuselage breaks into three peices and sinks to the bottom of the dark inky waters of a moonless ocean that you've come down in while your tangled in your seat with the lady from Row 15C on your lap.

KZ's USAF flight nurse corollary to Capt Hunch's very excellent description:

"Disintegration on impact is the most rapid form of egress."

 

[momrids6]

translation of doc in twitter below;

http://twitter.com/Idiosamcrasy/status/442871760757596160/photo/1

It is a report by a fisherman. Text is as follows (I've ignored grammatical correctness in favour of translating the message as given in the pic):

At 08/03/2014 at approximately 0130HRS, I friend of mine by the name of "Pader Rohim" and I, while fishing at Kuala Besar, Badang, saw the lights of an aircraft passing our location. The lights in question were from an aircraft, I was puzzled because the aircraft was flying rather lower than the other aircraft that I have usually seen before this. The aircraft in question was fyling below the clouds from the direction leaving the country. On returning home after sunrise, I heard that a MAS aircraft was missing. End of my report"

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/6016208

 

[momrids6]

"Just 9 percent of fatal accidents happen when a plane is at cruising altitude, according to a statistical summary of commercial jet accidents done by Boeing. The plane was last inspected 10 days ago and found to be "in proper condition," Ignatius Ong, CEO of Malaysia Airlines subsidiary Firefly airlines, said at a news conference."


http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...-loses-contact-with-plane-carrying-23-people/

 

[HMSHood]

The United States extensively reviewed imagery taken by American spy satellites for evidence of a mid-air explosion, but saw none at all, an authoritative U.S. government source said. The source described U.S. satellite coverage of the region as thorough.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/10/us-malaysiaairlines-flight-idUSBREA2701720140310

The Air India and Pan Am bombing used small bombs in the baggage compartment. I wonder if the explosions from those bombs would of been seen by satellite. The Pan Am bombing created a 20 inch hole, which caused explosive decompression. Probably the same case with Air India.

What I find strange is that there is no ping from the black box has been detected. I wonder if the airplane could of crashed on land. Air India Flight 182 wreckage was found not too long after it went down off the coast of Ireland. There was no distress signal from Air India. This is also the case with Pan Am Flight 103.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182"]Air India Flight 182 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103"]Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[gregjrichards]

translation of doc in twitter below;

http://twitter.com/Idiosamcrasy/status/442871760757596160/photo/1

It is a report by a fisherman. Text is as follows (I've ignored grammatical correctness in favour of translating the message as given in the pic):

At 08/03/2014 at approximately 0130HRS, I friend of mine by the name of "Pader Rohim" and I, while fishing at Kuala Besar, Badang, saw the lights of an aircraft passing our location. The lights in question were from an aircraft, I was puzzled because the aircraft was flying rather lower than the other aircraft that I have usually seen before this. The aircraft in question was fyling below the clouds from the direction leaving the country. On returning home after sunrise, I heard that a MAS aircraft was missing. End of my report"

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/6016208

Thank you very much for this momrids6.

 

[Plumeria5]

I thought of him, too, after the other pilots comments about thinking it was the co-pilot doing the muffled talking and his age.

jmo

Somewhere, I've forgotten where, there is an article saying that the other pilot talking to him did not happen. Not sure what to believe anymore.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Here is the real Italian Luigi Maraldi:

Source:
http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...nces-in-thailand/story-fnizu68q-1226849959855

So where is LM now? Is he in Italy or in Thailand?
Looking at his picture he could pass for an Arab more easily than Asian. His image isn't close to that of a Thai or Chinese person.

 

[Derryn Hunch]

KZ's USAF flight nurse corollary to Capt Hunch's very excellent description:

"Disintegration on impact is the most rapid form of egress."

Great quote! hahaha

Read back over my post and is a grammar nazi's worst nightmare lol... probably should have read over it before punching the "enter and send that thing to the masses!" button with enough enthusiasm to send it flying off the keypad...

 

[momrids6]

I thought of him, too, after the other pilots comments about thinking it was the co-pilot doing the muffled talking and his age.

jmo

the guys in an aviation forum state this supposed interaction is not true. Pilot could not have made contact 11 minutes after all communications/radar, etc went down