- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 10,623
- Reaction score
- 71,812
Good evening all
Just got home from work and I am wondering are there any new developments?
Just got home from work and I am wondering are there any new developments?
Why is transponder made available to the pilot to turn on or off?
Why,/when would a pilot want to turn it off?
Based on the bizarre behaviors of the Malaysians over this whole thing, I have now allowed my mind to consider: Could some factor or group within the Malaysians themselves be behind this? And if so, how and why?
How: Pilot and co-pilot were given orders and they followed them. Turn plane around. Then either come back to Malaysia (maybe even to the same airport or the smallest one that has a long enough runway) or go to some other pre-arranged place (which countries are buddy buddy with Malaysia ?). It would have been in the middle of the night when the plane returned. I assume the U.S. is looking at any and every place within flying distance that has a runway long enough to have accepted this plane.
Why: I really don't know the answer to this. Who are Malaysias enemies? The Chinese? Perhaps someone high up in the Malaysian government thought it would somehow "show the Chinese a lesson" to kidnap those 20 Chinese technology experts?
Whoever would/could have done this had to have: 1.) been a real idiot 2.) had a LOT of power to persuade 3.) been totally out of touch with reality to have thought there would not be an enormous amount of international interest in the incident
The whole "move along here, nothing to see hear" attitude - of even the President of the country - is suspicious to me.
Any thoughts?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/communications-systems-aboard-malaysian-jet-were-shut-down-separately/While that could suggest a deliberate act, CBS News aviation and safety expert Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger cautioned that it is "conceivable" that the communications systems could shut down sequentially on their own in the event of a catastrophic electrical failure. He said the systems in a plane are so compartmentalized that things could shut down in a cascading, domino fashion instead of all at once.
They wouldn't. They have no reason to.
When a transponder gets turned off, it raises my hinky meter.
I heard an expert a little while ago on cnn stating that systems could've shut down one by one. I'm going back to mechanical problem.
Flipping and flopping!
<snipped>
There are two, only one operates at a time. A switch on the transponder panel (labeled with positions L and R) selects the left one or the right one.
:seeya: ilovepierre, there are not many reasons why one be turned off.
Even it is turned off or faulty, why isn't there a back-up system?
Just trying to wrap my head around pilot/co-pilot suicide theory.
If either the pilot or co-pilot had decided they wanted to commit suicide, killed the other, than turned off the transponders and either killed themselves or let the plane do the job, what about the flight attendants?
If the scheduled flight went over the time it normally took, I think the flight attendants would have questioned that and tried contacting the captain or the co-pilot. If they were unable to communicate with the flight crew I think the flight attendants would have contacted or alerted someone on the ground to a problem.
I guess my question is this: Is there a way for the flight attendants to make contact with the outside world on an airliner????
They do have those phones that passengers can use on most all US flights, so I would think so.
If this was a suicide mission and the transponder was turned off and the plane allowed to fly on auto pilot until it ran out of fuel, than why didn't anyone on the plane make contact with someone on the ground?
Suicide and the plane flying on for hours just doesn't make sense, unless the pilots killed or incapacitated all those on board. The only way I can think of doing that would be to set off some kind of chemical bomb on board.
JMO
There are two, only one operates at a time. A switch on the transponder panel (labeled with positions L and R) selects the left one or the right one.
Im praying they overlooked the engine transmissions.
I have no doubt the lack of tracking by Malysian air control is the main reason a Malaysian plane was chosen.
again implies pilot cooperation.
Do we know for sure it actually kept flying for hours? Or is that just rumor at this point? I agree there is almost no way the pilot just drove around for hours before committing suicide. That would be incredibly odd and pointless, as would turning off the transponder - unless the theory is that he didn't want anyone to know it was a suicide so he didn't want it to be found. It seems quite unlikely to me, but so do all the other scenarios.
Nah, they were looking for crash debris. Almost put myself to sleep a couple times looking at over 1400 tiles of ocean waves. But I stopped looking this A.M.; I'm more convinced today (JMO) that we are not looking for wreckage, but an intact plane (with hopefully surviving passengers) somewhere.
I'm thinking along those same lines. Not everyone is (can be) as clueless as they've been trying to lead us to believe.
Here are a few more facts:
NO satellite record of midair explosion in the region
NO unaccounted for debris found on all the satellite tiles viewed at least 30 times each
'Pings' picked up by US space satellite for several hours after the plane disappeared from Malaysian radar. (If it happened, it happened. There can be no denying it later.)
More than 20 top technology people (non USA citizens) aboard that plane, including a mysterious PhD professor of technology and a group of Chinese and Malaysian nationals headed to a business conference on a Saturday morning, from a company named Freespace that specializes in high-technology electronic warfare and the production of radar-blocking aeronautic technology
the airplane's transponders that are used for radar communication were turned off (and manually is the only way according to experienced pilots)
US intelligence has determined deliberate, intentional, 2-part action in the above
In addition, there were reports of engine readings sent automatically by systems in the Boeing indicating the plane was in the air for 4 more hours after the last radar contact. While that's yet another thing some governments are trying to deny now, from what I understand, the sending of those transmissions is passive, something built into the Boeing 777 (and it's variants), and not something the pilot would actively send or not send. So the fact that people would first mention the readings, then deny receiving them, is also suspicious, IMO.
You're not thinking like a terrorist. Planes are expensive - why waste one of your own when you can steal someone else's? Perhaps part of the thrill is the risk. Failing is just taking one for the cause, there's always another terrorist ready to step up and take your place. I think whoever hijacked this plane (assuming) is planning to make a statement, a much bigger one than simply hijacking a plane. This was not a whim, it was a very well researched and well executed plan, IMO, and it hasn't reached stage 2 yet.
People would have thought 9/11 was impossible yet it happened.