The Best Flight 370 Scenario So Far - Theory of an actual pilot

reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery


I wouldn't put a lot of stock in eyewitness testimony. They are notoriously unreliable in incidents like this. There was an eyewitness that had it crashing in flames near Vietnam.

While this is a good theory, I would have to question the ability for a fire that would produce enough smoke and possibly burn the tires causing quick asphyxiation to all passenger, to allow for this flight to continue on for 4 more hours passing low over Maldives. That would be assuming the visual of the plane in Maldives is correct. If there was that much smoke and fire wouldn't this plane have been down long before then? I know there are other cases of planes catching on fire and whatnot, but how long have all those other planes stayed in the air with a fire burning out of control? If rubber, like the tires, catches on fire I do know they will burn quickly and hot. If that is what they are claiming may be the cause of passenger deaths then it would have to have occurred early in the flight. With a fire burning that hot there is no way this plane would have lasted another 4 hours in the air.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery

 

I wouldn't put a lot of stock in eyewitness testimony. They are notoriously unreliable in incidents like this. There was an eyewitness that had it crashing in flames near Vietnam.

Trouble is that it wasn't just one witness apparently.

reply to post by Daughter2


Communications weren't knocked out. They talked to another Malaysia plane after the ground. In an emergency communications with the ground is step 11 or so after fly the airplane, fly the airplane, fly the airplane, fix the problem, and find somewhere safe to get on the ground.

If it started in the ELT it wouldn't affect autopilot

reply to post by Vasa Croe


SwissAir flew for awhile after the fire started. If it was in the aft fuselage it could have flown for awhile. If they dumped fuel an climbed high enough the fire could have been reduced to where it smoldered for awhile before reigniting later. Or even gone out, causing damage that became catastrophic later.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


I've seen cases where four eyewitnesses in the same area told four different stories.

Gut feel says this isn't what happened. In addition, experience pilots commenting or not, they left out a lot of pertinent information, and there is way more to this. Their theories neither appear all that well thought out nor appear as detailed as many (even those who basically say and have said what they do) The simplest answer is not inversely proportional to that amount of chaff being flung around about this. The simplest answer probably is a weapons test gone wrong or a meteor strike.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

I've seen cases where four eyewitnesses in the same area told four different stories.

Right, but multiple eyewitnesses seeing a large commuter plane flying low is hard to get wrong. Regardless of color/markings of this plane, nobody is going to report something that is ordinary which tells me what they saw was out of the ordinary. Even if it happened to be another aircraft, this one fits the direction and timing of MH370. I doubt they mistook something that wasn't a really big plane flying low for a really big plane flying low.

Wouldnt the pilots have their own oxygen? What about the passengers oxygen masks? Would they be deployed?

Surely the pilots would be on oxygen if smoke started to appear in the cockpit....giving them time to do something about comms or alerting nearest aitrport of emergency?

Is there emergency broadcast on a separate system for scenarios where main electronics are affected by fire?

reply to post by Vasa Croe


One theory, the pilot realized there was a fire, and decided to climb to take oxygen away from the fire. If it was a tire on fire, the tire could have still smoldered and produced smoke, but without a large open flame. The same scenarios then still hold true.

Here is a youtube video of a tire fire on a plane occurring on landing. The same is possible during takeoff.

reply to post by celticniall


Great question celticniall.

In the case of a fire on board a plane, the last thing you want to do is add more oxygen to the plane. Oxygen is one of the three things needed for a fire to live. Emergency Oxygen Systems will not deploy in the event of a fire on board.

Emergency Oxygen System Wikipedia
If there is a fire on board the aircraft, masks are not deployed, as the production of oxygen may further fuel the fire.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


The average person couldn't tell a C-5 from a 737. They may have seen a white plane fly over heading to a runway in the area, but "large white plane" could be anything from a 737 to the missing 777.

reply to post by celticniall


The portable oxygen system the crew would use to fight the fire only lasts about 20-30 minutes or so. The idea is to get low enough to get to breatheable air.

Really good find, and I like this theory for it's logic and simplicity and the assumption of no foul play necessary. But if the plane seen flying over the Maldives was flight 370, then there is an issue correlating this theory with the flight direction reported from the Maldives.

Looking at Google Earth, if the pilot and first officer were incapacitated and the plane continued flying on autopilot in a straight line as this theory suggests, it would account for the plane flying over the Maldives island of Kuda Huvadhoo. But if this was flight 370, it would have had to make another sharp left turn to account for the flight direction described in the news story from the Maldives:

Eyewitnesses from the Kuda Huvadhoo concurred that the aeroplane was travelling North to South-East, towards the Southern tip of the Maldives – Addu. They also noted the incredibly loud noise that the flight made when it flew over the island.

SOURCE: Haveeru Online

Interestingly, that would appear to take the flight pretty directly toward Diego Garcia according to Google Earth.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

The average person couldn't tell a C-5 from a 737. They may have seen a white plane fly over heading to a runway in the area, but "large white plane" could be anything from a 737 to the missing 777.

Yeah....that is what I am getting at. Could have been any large white plane. Just so happens they don't see large white planes flying over low enough to see the doors normally and just so happens this one fits the time frame it would have been in the area. Could be coincidence but I am leaning towards it not.

Is there any way to look up prior landings and takeoffs from this airport on the 8th to see if any planes did that were registered to do so around that time in the morning?

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Try FlightRadar24.

reply to post by ikonoklast


So what reason did it go to Diego?

reply to post by xmaddness


This is a very good theory that fit with primary radar data. It would imply that Inmarsat team are a bunch of Bozo that deserve being fired for luring search operation in wrong direction. Upon further analysis of their two projected arcs, it appear they are constant distance from satellite projection to surface of earth, it mean constant and equal propagation time, meaning a strong indicator they don't know what they are doing... It must be noted that the other Inmarsat bird at 178degE is nearly at horizon or below for this region, TOF triangulation is improbable.

A side note, trajectory you propose give a straight line toward projected position of 64degE satellite, another possible solution if propagation delay of ping would match.

But you understand it is possibly the contingency plan if the operation were to be discovered; to take a couple of days to move debrits there & discredit other source of information that revealed the "Plan".

But your explanation fit very well with reality and I shall say well done sir!

Here is an example of a tire failing on takeoff, which could have easily ignited or smoldered inside the jet while flying.

reply to post by PeterMcFly


Thanks, the theory seems to fit, but remember that this is only a working theory.

I still want to hear all things that could debunk this theory! It needs to be tested and have all possibilities thrown at it to see if a plausible answer could still be fit to the puzzle.