Beijing-bound MAS plane carrying 239 people missing as of 20 mins ago.

Diagrams: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners

Boeing last week received a US patent for a system that, once activated, removes all control from pilots to automatically return a commercial airliner to a predetermined landing location. The “uninterruptible” autopilot would be activated – either by pilots, by onboard sensors, or even remotely via radio or satellite links by government agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency, if terrorists attempt to gain control of a flight deck. Boeing says: "We are constantly studying ways we can enhance the safety, security and effiecency of the world's airline fleet." “There is a need in the industry for a technique that conclusively prevents unauthorised persons for gaining access to the controls of the vehicle and therefore threatening the safety of the passengers onboard the vehicle, and/or other people in the path of travel of the vehicle, thereby decreasing the amount of destruction individuals onboard the vehicle would be capable of causing,” the patent authors write. “In particular, there is a need for a technique that ensures the continuation of the desired path of travel of a vehicle by removing any type of human decision process that may be influenced by the circumstances of the situation, including threats or further violence onboard the vehicle.”

www.flightglobal.com...

All the pieces of the puzzle fit now. MH-370 was hijacked and Boeing took control of the aircraft and flew it wherever would be hardest to find. Of course they will not own up to it.
EDIT: I can't figure out how to link to this incriminating pdf. Need help.

reply to post by Mikeultra


Yet another theory with a HUGE flaw. The patent was in 2006. The plane was delivered in 2002. When did it get this system supposedly installed?

Not to mention that patent does not equal in use.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra

 

Yet another theory with a HUGE flaw. The patent was in 2006. The plane was delivered in 2002. When did it get this system supposedly installed?

Not to mention that patent does not equal in use.

edit on 3/25/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/25/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

During one of the maintenance overhauls.

reply to post by Mikeultra


So they installed this autopilot that is so secret no one knows about it? Because there is not one record that I've ever heard of, of it being installed in a plane. Or anyone talking about it beyond the patent for it. Which again doesn't mean that it's in use.

But putting all that aside, what was the motive for Boeing to fly one of their planes to the middle of the ocean and crash it. This should be good.

reply to post by Zaphod58


"Limited" It burned the xxxing whole cockpit out.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra

 

So they installed this autopilot that is so secret no one knows about it? Because there is not one record that I've ever heard of, of it being installed in a plane. Or anyone talking about it beyond the patent for it. Which again doesn't mean that it's in use.

But putting all that aside, what was the motive for Boeing to fly one of their planes to the middle of the ocean and crash it. This should be good.

They had difficulty understanding the hijackers demands, and were uncertain if there was a dirty bomb or maybe a regular nuke stolen from Barksdale years ago. So the best option was to send it to the South Indian Ocean. Also this was a perfect opportunity to test their invention. Secretly they will let airlines know it works so they can sell it installed as original equipment from Seattle. Can you give me any tips on posting a link for a pdf in Adobe?

reply to post by Zaphod58


What about the fact that the plane turned around BEFORE the last voice communication?

THAT is the heart of this entire ordeal.

reply to post by UKGuy1805


How do you know how much it burned?

reply to post by Mikeultra


Wow, you're just throwing every conspiracy out there with this one aren't you.

There is absolutely zero proof that this system ever went beyond the patent stage. Patent does NOT mean installed on aircraft and in use.

Mikeultra

All the pieces of the puzzle fit now. MH-370 was hijacked and Boeing took control of the aircraft and flew it wherever would be hardest to find. Of course they will not own up to it.

Perhaps they were trying to land it at the closest safe landing area. I would think Boeing, being an American company wouldn't land in a country they didn't trust.

Perhaps they were going to try to land it at the military base at Perth but didn't make it because of low fuel.

reply to post by ltinycdancerg


You mean according to the Malaysian government? Which has thrown every different theory you can think of out there? Including conflicting ones.

reply to post by Daughter2


They would know that there was no way to make it there. The nearest friendly base is Diego Garcia. Again, there is absolutely no proof at all this system was ever installed on ANY aircraft, let alone on this one.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Have you not seen the pics shown on here? they show a complete burned out frontal cockpit area and seats, and like what was already mentioned anyone sitting there would have been severly burned.

Here is the smoking gun. Look up the patent and have a look. I can't figure out how to link a pdf. Just search for U.S. Patent 7840317 B2

reply to post by UKGuy1805


Of EgyptAir 667. There is nothing to say that it was the same type of fire, or what it was that happened to this plane.

reply to post by Mikeultra


Patent. Does. Not. Mean. In. Use. Again. It is not a "smoking gun" until you can prove it was installed on the flight in question. Or for that matter, ANY flight out there.

reply to post by Zaphod58


So - is there a safer type of fire that would knock out all communication equipment and let the plane travel several thousand miles to an airfield of choice????

The Voice of Russia Interview - FAA-FBI-ALPA - Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot: Civil Case 3:07-cv-24 - Civil Case 1:08-1600 (RMC) - Air Force Defense Attaché From Russia and Sukhoi

I gave this information to FAA-FBI-ALPA on 10 December, 2006. I filed two lawsuits over the Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot: Civil Case 3:07-cv-24 in 2007 and Civil Case 1:08-1600 (RMC) in 2008. I am available to Malaysia and China if you need more details. The basic idea of the Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot can be considered here:

www.abeldanger.net...

reply to post by UKGuy1805


There are fires that could be put out. There are electrical issues that could knock out some systems and leave others intact. There are a lot of things that could have happened on that plane besides hijacking, it carrying a nuclear weapon, and uninterruptible autopilot that there's no evidence ever existed beyond the patent stage, or any other wild and outlandish theory out there.

reply to post by Mikeultra


Prove it exists. Prove it even exists past the patent stage, instead of just spamming the thread with it. Show me one plane that has it installed.