Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68 (another 777)?

reply to post by Zaphod58


When it comes to wide-body, twin aisle jets, Boeing is ahead of all of its competitors by miles in terms of popularity and orders.

Regarding the supposed heavy cargo and there being 50 less available seats than normal, all I have found is that there was 4 tonnes of Mangosteens being exported to China.

Malaysia Airlines (MAS) flight MH370 was transporting 3-4 tonnes of mangosteens to China, said the airline's group chief executive officer Ahmad Jauhari Yahya (pic) today.

Sure, it is possible it could be a cover up for something else secretly among the cargo but this is what they have announced.

No Hazardous Cargo...

There are tonnes of conspiracy theories out there abot this flight.

1) It was shot down by the Chinese
2) It was shot down by aliens
3) It crashed into the sea adn disintigrated every piece of the jet and all its passengers
4) Aliens abducted them
5) They flew into a parallel dimention

There are more theories, the next as unlikely as the last. Give it a look. Do some research, and decide of what the mainstream media is telling you, is true....? Or, do they even know what they're talking about?

The FOURTH Dimension?

reply to post by DigitalSea


Excellent discovery and theory. As for the most realistic scenario, it ranks very high above the rest. Flying in the shadows, at the perfect timing of another 777 (SIA68) is a grand coincidence. Following another plane would definitely mask out flight MH370, allowing it to go undetected until reaching its break off point. However, once broken off with the idea of no military/satellite monitoring, would MH370 still be detected while trying to reach its final destination?

reply to post by Boeing777


Over 9,000 737s, the Asia market until this year has been almost exclusively Boeing, the African nations are heavily Boeing. So yeah there is a reason, that has nothing to do with remote control.

Long term viewer of ATS and this thread has finally made me join and contibute..

Great theory and the best I've read.

I do however have a question in relation to today's news release on the flight in that it dropped to an altitude as low as 5000ft to avoid detection.

Is this BS from the media or can this fit with this story?

reply to post by ChocolateStarfish


It's BS. That altitude would only get you below radar with terrain to hide you, and the turbulence from the terrain would tear the plane to pieces.

All the radar data (for that matter all the data but the satellite pings) is suspect at this point.

Interesting idea - flying in the shadow of another 777....... Is that what the flight simulator was for..??...
It gets the jet out of the potential search area and away without the "authorities" seeing it....

I'm still not sure that this aircraft is sitting in Diego Garcia...or subversively flown into China ......
Something going on at a grand scale...!!! Probably well never know.

However the theory on this thread suggests aircraft flew northward and not southward...

Regards

PDUK

reply to post by DigitalSea


Theory:
How MH370/MAS370 evaded primary radar detection: Keith Ledgerwood has provided a possible mechanism of hiding behing flight SIA68.

Fact:
Inmarsat has provided two possible solution probably by timing of reception of pulse from missing plane. Inmarsat-3 F1 is situated at 64.5° east, 35,786 km above sea.

Theory:
Inmarsat team have made a biased guess due to imprecision involved with timing of received pulse, or simply an error by overinflating latency by a couples of milisecond.

Fact:
The two arcs of the Inmarsat solution, when substracting couples of ms, give same exact arcs of trajectory but shifted toward Inmarsat location point on the sea. A shift of about 2000 km make the nortern arc match pretty well with flight path of SIA68.

Fact:
Last transmission from missing flight received from Inmarsat is 2014-03-08 01:11UTC

Fact:
Boeing 777-200ER (lost plane) MLW need about 5000ft (1500meters) of landing track.

Theory:
The lost plane continued to transmit (ping) Inmarsat for some time while on the ground.

Fact:
Flight SIA68 while possibly hiding the flight of the missing plane, just passed over "Pakistan Aerospace UAV Test Flight Facility" near Rahim Yar Khan at 22:30UTC. There is a nice isolated landing track of 1500m there.

Theory:
The missing flight landed at "Pakistan Aerospace UAV Test Flight Facility" 2014-03-07 22:30UTC and it continued transmit ping to Inmarsat while stationary. Note that the place match pretty well the end of the corrected trajectory arc.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I got more or less the same answer when I asked A guy I work with that worked on Inmarsat comms systems.

He believes that the two arcs being shown on the media are measured from the flight time of the signal. Apparently the protocol uses a pretty tight frequency tracking and a modulation for frame syncing. This could give you a signal flight time, which would define a distance between the satellite and the receiver, which gives you the arcs on the globe. The generation 3 satellite likely has a very high quality "clock".

Really hard to spoof the flight time in this scenario without a second plane. That would be one hell of an alibi, but I'll drop the US down my personal suspect list. Not off the list. Just down the list.

The signal strength measurement would be subject to the vagaries of the transceiver quality and antenna characteristics. I believe it would be too inaccurate to measure a decent distance.

Zaphod58
reply to post by eisegesis

 

Except for the minor fact that the computers can be overridden from the flight deck. You might be able to spoof the GPS but you can't spoof the back up navigation systems.

What is your take on this?

FAA to Allow Use of Electronics for Entire Flights

Could it have been possible that someone onboard may have hijacked this thing electronically just like hackers have been able to accomplish with OnStar in automobiles?

I do admire your technical knowledge, so I am basically at your mercy when it comes to these topics but, more and more fly-by-wire systems are just turning into giant computers. Funny how Boeing is generally against these new forms of automation. What is your opinion?

Only speculating of course...

What appears to be suitcases and other debris seen in satellite images in the Straits of Malacca by a Reddit user. A Greek flagged tanker is searching the area.

www.bigbreakingnews.com...

Zaphod58
What appears to be suitcases and other debris seen in satellite images in the Straits of Malacca by a Reddit user. A Greek flagged tanker is searching the area.

www.bigbreakingnews.com...

The tanker passed through the straits on Sunday without incident. When the story was released they were 4 hours from the alleged area.

reply to post by eisegesis


I just don't see a way to do it. The computer systems can be overridden by the pilots. Even if you could get into the Flight Control Computer, which uses unique software, they can override it. You could spoof the GPS, but a simple non-GPS backup takes that danger away.

reply to post by DigitalSea


If there was another 777 in the vicinity of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, then would it be a stretch to speculate that maybe that other 777 was the intended target of [something] and the abrupt termination of MH370 was unintended?

If motive is to be determined in the MH370 incident, then the nature of all the other flights in the area have to be investigated, and, at this late date, this may not be feasible.

me

How many more lies are they going to feed us?

Ian Mader, The Associated Press

Published Monday, March 17, 2014 6:15AM EDT

Last Updated Monday, March 17, 2014 4:57PM EDT



KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- Officials revealed a new timeline Monday suggesting the final voice transmission from the cockpit of the missing Malaysian plane may have occurred before any of its communications systems were disabled, adding more uncertainty about who aboard might have been to blame.

Now read that again. Does that make ANY sense to you? Me either. How #ing dumb do they think we are?

Could this be the 'FIRST CONTACT' we've been waiting for? Is this how the Powers That Be have decided to introduce us to our E.T. brethren?

We may never know... But, I highly doubt that. Give it time folks.... Give it time.

reply to post by DigitalSea


Location 5°39'08.0"N 98°50'38.0"E is not far from the location the missing plane passed over before catching up flight SIA68.

theworldisnotenough
If there was another 777 in the vicinity of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, then would it be a stretch to speculate that maybe that other 777 was the intended target of [something] and the abrupt termination of MH370 was unintended?

If motive is to be determined in the MH370 incident, then the nature of all the other flights in the area have to be investigated, and, at this late date, this may not be feasible.

The sequence of actions and events that took place on MH 370 were deliberate, intentional and took place on the aircraft.

DigitalSea




I came across this alternative theory as to what happened to flight MH370 and how it disappeared. Someone has done a lot of compelling research which suggests that it is possible flight MH370 was shadowing another 777 to avoid detection over particular parts of airspace it was flying through before continuing on to its final destination

This is entirely probable. I have a friend who used to fly 747's in that part of the world, he asked ATC one day if they had any traffic in his area to which they responded no.. He could see something very close to his aircraft and wanted to know what it was. Just after the radio call a Russian TU95 Bear broke away from under his aircraft! They were using his 747's radar plot to mask their own!

Now that I think about this makes a lot of sense as to how the aircraft defeated so many radars, good pick up, well done.

reply to post by DigitalSea


The concept you refer to here is called a "Weight Restricted" flight. This is where PAX seats are intentionally left open to reduce overall takeoff weight. There are a couple reasons for weight restricting a flight:

1. Reduced air density due to altitude or elevated air temperature.
2. Heavier than average cargo load.

Airlines won't admit this to you if you ask them, but pound for pound cargo pays better, so yes, they will dump seats in favor of cargo if need be. This is especially true on Asian routes too. I've actually had it happen to me (ironically, out of Kuala Lumpur too, but not on MAS. I was on Singapore.)