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

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by sy.gunson

 

Inmarsat and AAIB are qualified to know their stuff, they know more than you about the data, the details and the investigation and have concluded your theory of 'fire' as EXTREMELY UNLIKELY, so no matter how much you throw your dummy out the pram and calling me names, you are probably wrong and the guys qualified to say so, say so. Face the facts, making little conspiracy theories that are against the facts only proves your lack of facts.

I suggest you write to Inmarsat and AAIB, tell them your theory, do you think they didn't consider 'fire', 'structural', 'accidental' etc as a first call, pretty sure they did and their conclusion is that it is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY, but hey some guy making conspiracy theories on ATS doesn't agree, he want's his own theory. Tantrum much? At least you are a good case study for the psychology students.

edit on 25-3-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

And "their stuff" in this case as we know from the quotes which you provided was to study the aircraft route and communications.

I never called you names. I think you suffer an over rich imagination.

You suggested that I throw tantrums and suggested I was a prime candidate for psychiatric analysis which by your previous definition was a breach of rules against personal attacks. Well i am not going to cry boo-hoo to site administrators because you are doing a good enough job of drawing attention to yourself weithout be descending to your level.

I am not the one citing AAIB as a source.... you are so you write to them and you produce a credible citation of what they investigated.

You rely upon them so you can adduce the evidence. It is not my job to trawl for proof to support your claims.

carewemust
A theory I'd like opinions on, based on what's known thus far...

1. Terrorists attach a canister to the air supply with a mechanism for releasing a deadly gas at xx,xxx feet altitude.
2. Before passing out, the (hero) pilot is able to program the plane to fly the most remote path possible, over water.
3. Plane eventually runs out of fuel and crashes into the ocean.

Is this too simplistic?
-cwm

If a terrorist were to sabotage a flight they would do so to attract attention for their grievance. After a successful terrorist attack a terrorist group would claim credit.

Even where there is a suicide terrorist attack, Islamic terrorists will make a martyrdom interview video beforehand.

In fact both suicide and terrorism are based on martyrdom and sending a message to society...

Where is the message?

Your idea fails on basic psychology.

Pilots focus on technical cause, non pilots focus on conspiracy theory.

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by UKGuy1805

 

That doesn't explain the comms being switched off manually at intervals and the manual turn or how the autopilot would have kept going.

I think you will find that the British AAIB have proved that the turn was inputted by someone who understood aircraft systems. Indeed you yourself have referred to it.

The evidence from AAIB now excludes the possibility of a manual turn.

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by sy.gunson

 

I've heard that the massive turn the plane made would need an experienced pilot...
So does your theory suggest that the auto-pilot was turned on after it banked left???


Peace Sy!

For the first two weeks there were many contradictory suggestions, in particular that it flew west, descended and climbed etc. These are now excluded by doppler analysis of INMARSAT data.

AAIB who interpreted the INMARSAT data declared the turn back south was performed in a rational way by someone familar with aircraft systems... in other words by a pilot.

If you plot the direction from just south of Vietnam over Singapore then that is the same route towards the assumed crash site in the southern Indian Ocean. An autopilot if commanded to turn to a particular heading will perform that turn then keep on the same track until ordered to do otherwise.

What I am suggesting is a conscious pilot began the autopilot turn and then was incapacitated by explosive decompression. In other words the autopilot was not turned off.

reply to post by sy.gunson

What I am suggesting is a conscious pilot began the autopilot turn and then was incapacitated by explosive decompression. In other words the autopilot was not turned off.

Ok thanks pal, it's making a lot more sense now!!!

One final question, for now at least ...
So if the Auto-Pilot is already on, can Pilots still guide the flight manually to assist the AP in the apparently "massive" turn???

I'll take your word for it that AP could make the turn itself, I'm only wondering because "experts" have been saying its improbable!


Peace Sy!

CNN is reporting exactly 122 small pieces of debris have been spotted in the search area with black and white photos and lots of clouds. It looks like whitecaps to me and photos were taken from a plane. They also said one piece looks to be 77' long, nearly the size of 1 wing! I call propaganda on them. www.bbc.com...


EDIT: These images are allegedly from a French satellite. Even more doubtful they are anything but propaganda.

Guessing nobody on this thread has seen the new thread about a piece washing up on a Maldivian shore. This is some of the best evidence I have seen yet that this flight did not end up where they are searching.

Thread is here : www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is a pic from that OP...it appears to be a Halon Extinguisher from a jet liner, though reported as a possible mine.



Pic of halon extinguisher for comparison:

CharlieSpeirs
I'll take your word for it that AP could make the turn itself, I'm only wondering because "experts" have been saying its improbable!

I'm not sure what you mean is impossible and what experts said it, but I posted a video earlier in the thread where a news reporter went into a flight simulator flight deck with a flight instructor, and the news reporter entered a new waypoint into the computer to show how easy it was to do. As soon as he finished, you could see the the horizon tilt as the autopilot made the turn to go to the new waypoint.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Yes I did see that and the article from that paper had the MDFS claiming it was a mine. A lie. Now they are claiming it's not a mine, but they don't know what it is. They will probably throw it away or bury the evidence. They are very corrupt there.
www.haveeru.com.mv...

www.haveeru.com.mv...

reply to post by Mikeultra


They will indeed have some explaining to do, especially if this is found to be a piece of MH370 through the serial number. I am pretty convinced this is a Halon extinguisher canister, but of course can't know if it is from MH370, though what are the chances one of these would wash up on shore and not somehow be related?

1st Lawsuit Filed

A Chicago law firm has filed the first lawsuit in the case of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 – the beginning of 'multi-million dollar litigation' against both Malaysia Airlines and Boeing for manufacturing the 777, believed to have crashed in the southwestern Indian Ocean.

The claim, filed on behalf of Dr. Januari Siregar in Cook County, Illinois, calls for Boeing and Malaysia Airlines to hand over any information that could indicate equipment malfunction or error that led to the plane crashing, ABC News reports. Siregar's son was on board Flight 370. It demands of the defendants "evidence of findings of corrosion and fractures in the fuselage of the Boeing 777 fleet that could lead to catastrophic fatal depressurization of the cockpit."

Siregar's attorneys filed a motion for discovery in anticipation of the lawsuit today. An attorney at the law firm tells ABC that they are not limiting the number of defendants to Malaysia Airlines and Boeing, suggesting that airplane part manufacturers may surface in the process of discovery as potential culpable parties. The discovery request could lead directly to a lawsuit against Malaysia Airlines, Boeing, and several other potential parties depending on what information surfaces, and such a lawsuit would require Malaysia Airlines to take to American courts regarding the flight.

Litigation is also expected in China, as the majority of the plane's passengers were Chinese nationals.

www.breitbart.com...

Seems premature, but who knows who knows what???

reply to post by theabsolutetruth


Some recent tabloid-type "journalism" to further support the suicidal pilot theory:

www.nzherald.co.nz...

Flight MH370: Pilot in wrong state of mind to fly - friend

Captain facing family and relationship problems before plane disappeared.

The captain of Flight 370 was in no state of mind to fly the day it disappeared and could have taken the Boeing 777 for a "last joyride" before crashing into the Indian Ocean, a fellow pilot says.

Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah's world was crumbling, said the long-time associate. He had been facing serious family problems, including separation from his wife and relationship problems with another woman he was seeing.

The man, who spoke to the Herald on condition of anonymity, said Captain Zaharie was "terribly upset" when his wife told him she was leaving and believed he may have decided to take the Malaysia Airlines plane to a part of the world he had never flown in.

Would be more trustworthy to me if the source was not speaking on "condition of anonymity."

...And:

The friend said the disappearance of the Boeing 777 happened as Captain Zaharie's world was crumbling.

"He's one of the finest pilots around and I'm no medical expert, but with all that was happening in his life Zaharie was probably in no state of mind to be flying."

Inquiry source: Crash 'deliberate act'
Sources close to the inquiry were quoted by Britain's Daily Telegraph as saying investigators believed Flight 370 was crashed deliberately.

"This has been a deliberate act by someone on-board who had to have the detailed knowledge to do what was done," an official source said.

Investigators believe no malfunction or on-board fire was capable of causing the aircraft's unusual flight or the disabling of its communications system, or of taking it on a seven-hour flight wildly off course.

New Zealand aviation expert Peter Clark said he believed Captain Zaharie may have been responsible.

"This had to be a pilot or somebody with expert knowledge, who had to know what they were doing to complete this," Mr Clark said.

"It had to be somebody with immense knowledge ... the co-pilot would not have the capability of doing this. It's a takeover of the aircraft, it can only be the pilot."

He said Mr Fariq was "too inexperienced" to carry out the takeover - it was his first flight as co-pilot without a third pilot in the cockpit overseeing him.

Mr Clark said it would have been very simple for the pilot to reprogramme the flight management computer to fly a new course.

"All you need to do is fly it to high altitude, de-pressurise the aircraft, you kill everybody on-board including yourself and you have the flight management programmed in and it just continues to fly to the South Indian Ocean until it runs out of fuel."

But Mr Clark said it would be very hard to prove it was pilot suicide even if the data recorders were found.

Legitimate outcome, or another red herring for the Malaysians, Boeing, other sources???

Only time will tell, or not, I suppose.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


And it appears they now are looking into this as being a fire suppression system from an aircraft. Would really mean some serious backlash for Malaysia if this turns out to be from MH370.

www.haveeru.com.mv...

The unknown object found in Baarah in Haa Alif Atoll of the Maldives is "very likely" to be a fire suppression bottle from an aircraft, local aviation experts said on Wednesday.

Residents of the island have assumed the object, which was found washed up at the beach on Monday, to be bomb or sea mine, but the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) on Wednesday said it was not an explosive device. But the army did not specify the nature of the object.

An experienced local aircraft engineer, who wished to remain anonymous, told Haveeru that the object is "very likely" to be a fire suppression bottle from an aircraft.

"But I'll have to see it in person and cross check the part number on it. Then only I'll be able to say which type of aircraft it belongs to," the aircraft engineer said.

Two other aircraft engineers and a Maldivian pilot working at a foreign airline also said that the object was "likely" a fire suppression bottle from an aircraft. However, they also decline to arrive at a conclusion unless they see the object in person.

The news of the unidentified object, believed to be a fire suppression bottle from an aircraft, comes about a week after several residents of Kuda Huvadhoo in Dhaal Atoll claimed to have seen a "low flying jumbo jet" at around 6:15am on March 8 – the day of the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


The "experts" are somewhere lost within the 200+ pages I'm afraid!!!
& I said improbable not impossible!!!
Improbable in the sense of the short timing & the extremity of pretty much a 180 turn!!!

Like I said I already take Sy's word that it's possible to do...
The only thing I'm left wondering is manual piloting possible while autopilot is on... as an assistance measure???


Peace Arbi!

CharlieSpeirs
Like I said I already take Sy's word that it's possible to do...
The only thing I'm left wondering is manual piloting possible while autopilot is on... as an assistance measure???

Not sure how it works on the 777 but the inadvertent attempt to do so led to this Airbus crash because the manual inputs partially but not completely disengaged the autopilot:

Aeroflot_Flight_593

Peace Arbi!

Likewise.

An oceanographer who studied the Southern Ocean wrote an article in The Conversation about where (and when) debris (any type) may wash up. Within this article is a map that tracks movement via currents over a decade. Bits could sweep under Australia, move around New Zealand, and eventually head into the South Pacific.

This simulation was made up of the data trajectories of the thousands of drifting buoys deployed in the ocean over the last three decades. As you can see, some of the debris will move to the Indian Ocean off Perth while some of it will end up in the South Pacific Ocean.

Source: theconversation.com...

A ping attempt failed connect 8 minutes after the last ping. Wonder if that is the crash time.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Thanks pal!
Explains a lot... and as I suspected it could possibly exacerbate things attempting both!!!
I don't know what I'm trying to piece together at the moment, but reports have been pretty contradictory from all angles...
This seemed important to ask!!!


Peace Arbi!

roadgravel
A ping attempt failed connect 8 minutes after the last ping. Wonder if that is the crash time.

That's interesting.
Only pinging once an hour - on the money each hour for the last 5 or 6 hours...
Then
Someone (Who? - Inmarsat?) tries to ping it 8 minutes after the "8:11" ping...?
How coincidental is that?

ETA: (Wouldn't happen to have a source on that info - would you?)
Thanks.

Someone was looking for info on the body washed ashore? Was it Onehuman?

Anyway all I could find was the following links, nothing about dogs so far.

Link Graphic Image