Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #13

[CARIIS]

Somehow, earlier today, a news post on here said it was crates of lithium ion batteries and they were properly packaged. :sigh: Another news cull and spin I fear.

Nothing to do with the airbus lithium stories that started at first with this plane, only culling from peoples posts about what kind and size of lithium battery. :sigh:

that claim "properly packaged" was uttered today by the gentleman , when asked about cargo. after a major incident responded that on a jumbo jet the most telling item in the cargo bay was fruit is obserd its insulting.

Espeically coming from a CEo that is fully aware that his airline is a class 9 certified danger carrier

that fact, would make a ceo demand to see the manifest personally quickly not a half a month later --=- reeks of lets just see if we can again with some fruit being on board a translantic fight into a highly technolical country......

 

[Woe.be.gone]

yes exactly! no one else can edit your post, just you

In case nobody has mentioned this, someone has the ability to edit another poster's post when they quote it to include it with their reply.
I've never sensed anybody altering my posts other than to snip, make shorter, part of it out and then writing 'snipped for space'.

When the above is done, the original post stays the same as when it was written.

 

[Forensics]

In my opinion, it would be likely that a fire emergency, left uncontained, would have destroyed the plane much sooner than the additional seven hours it supposedly flew. On the other hand, mechanical failure could have resulted in a drop in cabin pressure that may have rendered the crew and passengers unconscious. leaving the plane to fly on its own until it ran out of fuel.

Some say that the possible debris field in the Southern Ocean would be out of range of the aircraft, but Professor Middleton, an Australian aviation expert has said that the plane would have glided 100kms before it would crash. The new-generation can glide 10 kilometres for every one down. In other words, if a plane was 10km up in the air, it could glide 100km without fuel or a conscious pilot to navigate the plane. Definitely, a possibility I think.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Expert on CNN now saying NOT having at least one of ELTs alerting is strange. Search should be extended over earth for this reason.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

The Navy ship that has been helping search for the missing Malaysian airliner is dropping out of the hunt, U.S. military officials said Monday.

The Navy's 7th Fleet determined that long-range naval aircraft are a more efficient means of looking for the plane or its debris, now that the search area has broadened into the southern Indian Ocean. Long-range Navy P-3 and P-8 surveillance aircraft remain involved in the search, Cmdr. William Marks, a spokesman for the 7th Fleet, said in an emailed statement.

The decision was made in consultation with the government of Malaysia.

The USS Kidd, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer that has been searching in the Indian Ocean, will return to its normal duties.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...t-search-uss-kidd-to-return-to-normal-duties/

My uncle was in the Navy and became a Seebee after the Korean War, and had several tours in Vietnam then went to Diego Garcia in 1971 -1972.

I don't think it's there. I still look to Pakistan and radical Muslims and the plane being a flying bomb.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Simulator deletions closer to the date of disappearance now confirmed. Reasons for deletions not reported yet. All deletions didn't occur on the same day. Additional dates haven't been revealed.

 

[lawstudent]

If there was a fire, the pilots would divert the plane and fly to the nearest airport for an emergency landing.

Unless they can't get there in time - that's certainly the procedure, but there are many incidents of a plane on fire trying to get back and failing.

If the lithium batteries are just sitting there unplugged, than no chance for the, to go up in flames.

Is it true that if they are not in a device that they can't start a fire? I suppose another possibility could be something else starting a fire that would normally have not been an issue, and then igniting the batteries. Not saying it's likely, but like with the Everglades flight, it could happen.

re If a pilot doesn't respond and a plane vanishes off radar, ATC is powerles
I do not ever remember reading an ATC (unless tech) wherein a ATC is not getting a response. then vanishes does not do anything for 2 hours

Haven't there been some hypoxia crashes where that happened? Usually when ATC loses contact, they know there's either been a problem or are alerted to the crash by others nearby, so they just alert the authorities to go look. In this case it was a little harder to figure out what went wrong, because there were no indications it had suffered harm.

The plane can't be traced because the systems that are in place to do that were either shut down deliberately or failed at separate times for some undetermined reason.

Every time another safety factor, ELTs and/or GPS, is mentioned there is a reason given why they didn't work, aren't expected to work anyway or were of no use in the case of this plane. GPS needs a receiver to work (anything beyond that is above my head). If the systems are shut down all the locator features (expect the SATCOM, part of the ACARS, in this case) no longer worked.

It's not as if the systems to track planes don't exist, it is that someone went to great lengths to stop them from working, allegedly. . . .

It isn't as if there aren't tracking systems in place, it is that nobody expects or expected them all to fail at once or whatever happened to make them stop working and then have every other circumstance seem counter to a catastrophic crash scenario occurring.

For the future, these systems will have to be improved and the public has the right to know what the plane they are flying on is equiped with such as full ACARS and WIFI and whatever else increases the odds of finding the plane quickly if it goes down.

For me, it is difficult to accept that all the bad luck coincidences this flight had going for it happened by chance.

THANK YOU! The technology exists - it wasn't used or was disabled. Your phone isn't magically trackable - you can turn off the location services, and the phone company could shut off the cell towers/they could become damaged. You could drop your phone in water and ruin it. There are many things that could happen. Let's not pretend we can easily track anything but planes.

I agree it would have to be an awful lot of bad luck. Passengers don't know what half the technology is so I don't think that would help much - in some countries, people fly on ill-equipped airlines all the time simply because they have no other choice or can't afford better. I'm sure they knew it didn't have Wifi - that's generally easily discoverable. I assume my plane doesn't have Wifi when I fly. And normally, all the systems allow us to quickly find a crashed plane quickly - as you said, everything seemed to go wrong here. Had I been informed about the equipment available on this flight, I would still have flown on it - it doesn't indicate any red flags to me. If they can't find the plane and it crashed, that's almost certainly because it's in the ocean, and I would have been beyond help.

 

[ToutCa]

Huh?

He *points out* that there is much more information than what is being released publicly, along with *pointing out* some other very interesting points. He is speculating as well, and says so, but he is a Lt General, and he does have many more contacts within the intelligence community than the average Joe. I'm saying that you don't want to toss out information just because you don't trust where it's coming from. We can't really trust much of the information we're getting. That's all.

BBM

As you yourself state, McInerney is providing speculation, not information.

He's a retired general passing on rumors and speculation from his network of associates. That's to be taken with as large a grain of salt as possible.

History has shown that the speculation of the intelligence community is often at variance with the actual facts.

I don't dismiss his speculation. I take it seriously, but don't credit it as eminently more valid than the bulk of the (often violently disagreeing) speculation we've heard from all sorts of expert quarters since the plane vanished.

 

[lawstudent]

Yeah, like the old fashioned satellite dishes people use to have in their yards before they were made small enough to fit on a roof. They do still have those kinds of satellites. They're ground control satellites.

Is that a satellite or a signal receiver from a satellite in the sky? I think by definition a satellite is in space, but I'm not positive.

 

[CARIIS]

All this is related to the hysteria in the media to alright goodnight (a nicety) t!!f

Please notice that the first sentence starts with a nice greeting from this person
Please note the next sentence same back from tower totally congruent with last word behaviorally

Please note the next two sentences he repeats data given (again behavioral habit stuff)

The next two interactions contain pleases TY back and forth

an atmosphere has been established between the two

Two sent later another kind word with one another
Next sent please again

A short time before the handoff he makes sure everyone is on the page reminding all involved that he is maintaining 35 seems like diiligent pilot

In sum I counted 11 pleasantries while the two were interacting

the final two words are congruent with the rapport that had been established between the two from the onset!

 

[CARIIS]

They still carrying on . Think about a plane cannot be BURNING for 90 minutes without crashing over the land it transversed for that peroid of time


They need to make up their minds...............for 7 hours the it was on fire!!

Fire in the air is one of the most hazardous situations that a flight crew can be faced with. Without aggressive intervention by the flight crew, a fire on board an aircraft can lead to the catastrophic loss of that aircraft within a [B]very short space of time[/B

NOT: 90 minutes or 7 hours!

]. Once a fire has become established, it is unlikely that the crew will be able to extinguish it

http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Fire_in_the_Air

There may be longer one but the longest in flight fire I remember reading about was from 18:51 -19:20.

Air Canada Flight 797 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[popsicle]

Retweeted by Jon Ostrower https://twitter.com/jonostrower
AMSA News ‏@AMSA_News 56m

Three aircraft have now departed Perth for the #MH370 search area. Three more aircraft will depart later today. http://bit.ly/1gH6NTG

 

[SmoothOperator]

Not any of the original posters nor all that air traffic knowledgeable myself, but I think this is a pretty simple deal. ATC = Air Traffic Control. They can sit in their tower and monitor the information the plane is sending out via various methods (such as the transponder). But if the pilots stop talking and the transponder is off, there's nothing they can do, they are effectively blind and deaf to the plane (I guess unless it is nearby, and on radar).

Imagine you're on a long road trip with your cellphone and an OnStar system. If you turn off your phone and turn off the OnStar system, you're still driving along but:

a) we don't know where you are (unless you happen to physically drive right past us) because you turned off the system that helps locate you and navigate (in the car scenario, the OnStar system)

b) we don't have the ability to talk to you since you turned off your phone

So you can still cruise along but no one can talk to you or help you navigate (or even know where you are, unless we get lucky).

Which, IMO, all of the above is completely ridiculous in terms of the other side of the analogy dealing with commercial aircrafts, that carry civilian passengers.. Why in the hell-o would these all important NECESSITIES even have the ability to be turned OFF??..As far as I can tell, in speaking specifically about civilian passenger aircrafts, there is truly no good reason for powering off these necessities during any commercial flight that is carrying civilian passengers...So, WHY, WHY, WHY are these utmost of important tools even made to have the ability to be powered OFF??...IMO, that should not even be an available option..jmo.

*and to clarify..I am not saying the above member's post is ridiculous, I am saying that commercial aircraft that carry civilian passengers should not even have the ability to be powered off(tracking, communication, etc. abilities)

**Please forgive the limitations that come w/my posting via mobile ATM**

 

[Isabelle]

If the lithium batteries are just sitting there unplugged, than no chance for the, to go up in flames. Not sure why that was brought up.

Hopefully, the passengers will be found alive, but looks unlikely.

Pressure change causes them to explode.

 

[kalekona]

Thank you for your insight on the military angle, both US and foreign. Yes, a shoot-down by someone is possible (but the 7.5 hrs in the air makes it tricky).

It's not true, however, that neither Malaysia nor Vietnam noticed the plane was missing for hours. Vietnam ATC knew it was missing right away:

1:19am: "Alright goodnight" spoken to Malaysian ATC.
1:21am: MH-370 Transponder goes off.
1:22-1:30am: Vietnam ATC attempts to reach MH-370, fails. Vietnam ATC asks nearby flight to contact MH-370.
1:30am: Nearby flight reports to Vietnam ATC MH-370 reply is only mumbling.
2:40am: Vietnam ATC notifies Malaysian Airlines it can't contact MH-370.

Vietnam ATC did take 1hr 10min to notify the airline. There was that delay.

But nothing much could have been done at that point. No one had a clue where the plane had gone. An earlier notification by Vietnam ATC would not have changed matters.

It's also normal in airplane disasters for airlines and countries to wait for announcements until a plane would have run out of fuel. The final hope is that the plane perhaps had major communication failure (radio/transponder), but may well turn up at the destination airport or another airport in its range.

My point was that there was a delay in looking for the plane &t hat delay is why we have no clear idea where to look for it.

 

[Nymeria]

Which, IMO, all of the above is completely ridiculous in terms of the other side of the analogy dealing with commercial aircrafts, that carry civilian passengers.. Why in the hell-o would these all important NECESSITIES even have the ability to be turned OFF??..As far as I can tell, in speaking specifically about civilian passenger aircrafts, there is truly no good reason for powering off these necessities during any commercial flight that is carrying civilian passengers...So, WHY, WHY, WHY are these utmost of important tools even made to have the ability to be powered OFF??...IMO, that should not even be an available option..jmo.

*and to clarify..I am not saying the above member's post is ridiculous, I am saying that commercial aircraft that carry civilian passengers should not even have the ability to be powered off(tracking, communication, etc. abilities)

**Please forgive the limitations that come w/my posting via mobile ATM**

I don't know about all the other things, but I heard it said the ACARS has the off switch so that when the planes are on the ground after landing they can turn it off (so as not to confuse ATC with a bunch of planes on the ground transmitting location).
However, maybe they should find a way for it to disengage itself once the plane is no longer at an altitude. Then at least we would not have a situation like this again.

ETA- OK, my last sentence would not be good either, now that I think about it. That would mean a plane that crashes would not transmit either.
But there has to be a better way! I also found this article-


Here's Why Pilots Can Turn Off A Plane's Communication Systems

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-plane-tracking-systems-can-be-turned-off-2014-3#ixzz2weHv8SZZ

ALSO ETA- I think they were talking about the transponder being shut off when thy land, not ACARS.
I am getting a headache :banghead: Forgive my errors, please.

 

[lawstudent]

Which, IMO, all of the above is completely ridiculous in terms of the other side of the analogy dealing with commercial aircrafts, that carry civilian passengers.. Why in the hell-o would these all important NECESSITIES even have the ability to be turned OFF??..As far as I can tell, in speaking specifically about civilian passenger aircrafts, there is truly no good reason for powering off these necessities during any commercial flight that is carrying civilian passengers...So, WHY, WHY, WHY are these utmost of important tools even made to have the ability to be powered OFF??...IMO, that should not even be an available option..jmo.

*and to clarify..I am not saying the above member's post is ridiculous, I am saying that commercial aircraft that carry civilian passengers should not even have the ability to be powered off(tracking, communication, etc. abilities)

**Please forgive the limitations that come w/my posting via mobile ATM**

Anything humans build, humans can turn off. That's just the nature of it. Everything needs a power source. If there's an electrical fire or something of that nature, powering the system becomes dangerous. And if it was automated, what if the system malfunctioned? A pilot would need the ability to turn it back on. Plus, even if there were no buttons, you would cut a wire or whatever. Everything needs power, and power can always be cut.

 

[ilovepierre]

Is that a satellite or a signal receiver from a satellite in the sky? I think by definition a satellite is in space, but I'm not positive.

I assume it's a signal receiver.
I just call all dish objects, a satellite.

 

[ToutCa]

My point was that there was a delay in looking for the plane &t hat delay is why we have no clear idea where to look for it.

But there wasn't a delay in looking for the plane. There was a 1 hr 10 min. delay in Vietnam ATC informing the airline the plane had lost contact.

Malaysian Airlines and the Malaysian government started the search as soon as the plane did not arrive.

Now, Malaysia clearly bungled how the search was carried out.

They refused to listen to other countries and even their own military and wasted 4-5 days looking in areas the plane could not have been.

But even then, the reason they had no clear idea where to look had nothing to do with a delay in looking for the plane. It had to do with conflicting and confusing evidence, and a truly bizarre scenario which resulted in a plane flying off radar 7.5 hours to an area that can't be narrowed down further than millions of square miles over land and sea.

Starting the search earlier wouldn't have mattered. We'd still be in the exact same pickle we're in today.

 

[lawstudent]

I assume it's a signal receiver.
I just call all dish objects, a satellite.

Yeah, I think a lot of us use that term in everyday conversation, but I think we mean a satellite receiver.