Airliner missing between Malaysia and Cambodia/Vietnam, terrorism possible

[Dayuhan]

Flight MH370 took off from Kuala Lumpur at 12:41 a.m. Saturday en route to Beijing. Somewhere between Malaysia and Vietnam, the plane carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew members lost contact with ground controllers.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/mystery-of-missing-malaysia-airlines-jet-deepens-1.1721681#ixzz2vg6fEyRg

Still no trace of the aircraft repoprted, search in its 3rd day.


On Monday, authorities questioned travel agents at a beach resort in Thailand about two men who boarded the plane with stolen passports.

The men had onward tickets to Europe. It's not known whether they had anything to do with the plane's disappearance. Criminals and illegal migrants regularly travel on fake or stolen documents.

Police said the travel agency was contacted by an Iranian man known only as "Mr. Ali" to book the tickets for the two men. Thailand police said it's common to use an alias when doing business there.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4406050-baffled-investigators-can-t-rule-out-anything-regarding-missing-jet/

Not a basis to conclude that terrorism was involved, but not a good sign either. If nothing else, knowing that people can board a flight so easily using passports reported as stolen should draw attention to the very sporadic use of the stolen document database.


Malaysian authorities have indicated mechanical or piloting problems could be reasons for the apparent crash, the U.S. sources said.

A U.S. source said one reason Malaysian authorities are leaning away from the act of terror theory is because electronic evidence indicates the jetliner may have made a turn back towards Kuala Lumpur before it disappeared.

http://www.voanews.com/content/vietnam-searchers-fail-to-find-debris-from-missing-airliner/1867761.html

Obviously no conclusions can be reached; more will be known in time...

[Biggus]

An article at Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/03/10/why-cant-the-malaysian-air-boeing-777-be-found/)that doesn't add too much to the discussion, but includes the following in the comments section:




A plausible explanation…

Like many people, I’ve been following the events surrounding the loss of the Malaysian B777 with great interest.
I rarely offer any theories, conjecture, or ideas relating to aircraft accidents, mainly because there are simply too many things to consider, and often, too many unknowns. Most often I find it in very poor taste to come up with some short sighted offing before we know anything about what really happened. I very much hate to jump to conclusions.

The media the past few days has been inundated with “experts”, pundits, and just goofy conspiracy theorist coming up with all kinds of ideas all over the map. In the end, they all say they have absolutely no clue as to what could have gone wrong.
As much as I hate to speculate… I feel as a professional pilot, and Captain on the B777, I can offer a very plausible explanation based on my experience in the B777 aircraft, and in the aviation industry, to help quell unsubstantiated rumors, and just outright falsehoods being disseminated in the media.

Seems we need to have a boogeyman to fear… so the terrorism angle gets a lot of play. VERY often on our flights we get passengers with false or incorrect documents… and they are off-loaded before we leave the gate. Occasionally somebody gets by, and they are stopped at immigration at the landing airport, and are summarily sent back to where they came from. It happens.
In the Southeast Asia area, there is an enormous amount of drug trafficking, (a good portion going to China from Thailand) and the current 2 suspects seem to me to fit the bill as nothing more than “mules” running drugs and taking advantage of the 72 hour free visa option when entering China with follow on tickets to other destinations. (In this case the passengers had tickets to Amsterdam and follow-on to Copenhagen and Frankfurt). By utilizing this visa option, they are able to slip into China and “get lost”… and never utilize their “follow-on flights… it’s just a matter of getting the pay… and making their way back to Thailand (or where ever). Make sense? It happens everyday…

As for the aircraft. The B777 is a great airplane, but occasionally things go wrong! I would direct you to an event that occurred in July of 2011 in Cairo, Egypt. Again, a B777-200 while boarding the final passengers, an electrical short resulted in the heating of an oxygen hose and burst into an uncontrolled fire in the cockpit. The cockpit was destroyed in a matter of minutes, though thankfully the plane being on the ground… the passengers were evacuated… and only minimal injuries where incurred.

The following link will direct you to an article on the event, with pictures and explanations…

http://avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7/0000

A sobering comment can be found at the bottom of the page as a “latest comment”.

Much has been speculated as to why no radio call was made…. with the noisy environment inside the cockpit, it’s doubtful anyone would hear an initial “pop” as they did in the Egypt Air ground incident…. so it could be assumed that there was a great possibility an intense and uncontrolled fire could have started and consumed the cockpit in a matter of seconds.

All the communication interfaces we have on the B777 are located within arms reach of us… and in an intense fire, would be completely disabled within a matter of minutes…if not seconds. (refer to the pictures in the article) Transponders (the box that sends ATC our position) would be rendered useless, thus… NO ATC could see the aircraft as it diverted or fell from altitude. ACARS (our “text message” system that we communicate to the ground with… and sends vital aircraft information to the company), would be useless and thus no messages about the aircraft system status’s would be available to transmit. And lastly, trying to make a radio call when all of a sudden the cockpit burst into flames???? Remember, it was 3 AM in the morning… probably quiet from a work standpoint… and most of the time we just fight to stay awake on these late night flights! Imagine how startled you’d be if something like this occurred? Another scenario would be that perhaps there was only one pilot in the cockpit at the time, and the other had gone to the restroom, etc.
The First Officer on the Malaysian flight was a VERY inexperienced cadet pilot….. yes, I fly with them all the time to here at XXXX, and it’s a “less than desirable” situation. But it happens all the time, and in this case, the FO only had 2700 hours…. if he was in the cockpit and something catastrophic happened… who knows the outcome?? (Just a thought)

IF… and IF… a scenario like this was to play out, it would offer a very plausible explanation as to what could have occurred, and also explain why no radio calls where made… or ACARS messages sent, or ATC radar contact, etc. It would also explain that if both pilots were subdued, or forced to evacuate the cockpit, the aircraft could have flown for any number of minutes or hours for that matter (based on the fuel available) in ANY DIFFERENT DIRECTION, until fuel starvation, or autopilot failure.

ATC in this part of the world does NOT have the capability to monitor “raw (radar) targets” with any reliability…(nor does ATC in the US for that matter) and furthermore, an aircraft, basically invisible to radar heading out into the wild blue sea would be very difficult, if ever to be found. It all depends on when the autopilot would fail.

I’m not saying this is what happened to the ill fated Malaysian aircraft, but it is a very plausible explanation, and I’m appalled that the so-called experts are scratching their collective heads and haven’t offered this as a possible explanation.
There are other possibilities…. but because of a limited history of this type problem in the past with the 777 (and other Boeing aircraft)… there is always the possibility that it could occur again… and perhaps in this case… while inflight.

The rush to jump on the terrorism band wagon I believe is ill-advised… and though it should be explored, is probably a wild goose chase based on the ever ongoing drug trade that utilizes these routes all to often…..

There are very few things in the B777 that can get you in a big heap of trouble in a hurry… the explanation and example given above is just one of very few.

I hope this adds to your insight of potential explanations…

Now… back to watching the “experts” scratch their heads….

Capt. Tom

A bit of food for thought.

[carl]

Capt. Tom knows what he is about.

[ganulv]

Matthew L. Wald (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/matthew_l_wald/index.html?action=click&contentCollection=Asia%20Pacific&module=Byline&region=Header&pgtype=article) at the New York Times penned a Q&A related to the disappearance (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/world/asia/q-and-a-on-the-disappearance-of-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370.html) which went online today.

-----------------------

Q. and A. on the Disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370

[…]

Q. Plane crashes most often happen on landing or takeoff, but this flight vanished almost an hour after takeoff when it was cruising. What could cause a plane to crash at that point in a flight?

A. In three crashes at sea in the last few years, the aircraft’s speed-sensing systems have malfunctioned. In two of those cases, crews failed to diagnose and cope with the problem. In the third, there was probably nothing they could have done.

[…]

[Dayuhan]

This morning's news (morning in my time zone)...

Report that the jet may have changed course and flew a considerable distance after the last contact, meaning search may be in the wrong place:

http://www.dw.de/malaysia-jet-search-area-widened-after-reports-the-plane-switched-course/a-17488778

The two men traveling on stolen passports were both Iranian, but are not believed to have any terrorist links and appear to be illegal migrants:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26525281

[davidbfpo]

I find the reporting from Malaysian authorities slightly odd or is it just me?

The civil authorities refer to the radar tracking to the east of Malaysia; which is where an international search commences.

Then the military authorities refer to the possibility the flight reversed course and flew to the west - possibly crashing into the rather busy Malacca Straits.

So why didn't the civil and military radar operators not talk to each other at the time? Starting with: 1) where is the flight, 2) have you spotted it?

A new timeline, with maps and more:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10687223/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-plane-crash-live.html

[Dayuhan]

A great deal seems odd in what we read about the incident, but it's hard to say whether that's due to gaps in procedure or gaps in reporting.

Whether or not the people traveling on stolen passports had anything to do with the disappearance, the incident is drawing attention to a thriving cottage industry in forged documents:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/10/thailand-trade-fake-passports-crime-gangs-world

[carl]

This is just an idle thought but if the plane went down in tropical forest, they would have a very, very difficult time finding it, especially if they don't have a clue where to look. And apparently they don't. The forest just swallows things up. But then the Emergency Locator Transmitter should be putting out signal. Which it isn't. This has the makings of a Twilight Zone episode.

[Biggus]

My understanding is that ELTs are not as reliable as one would expect.

The Malaysian story doesn't seem particularly consistent right now. Perhaps having an unknown radar contact flying through your airspace and doing nothing about it is something of an embarrassment that the Malaysians don't really want to talk about.

[Dayuhan]

This is one of the first things I've seen that actually offers a credible reason for the vanishing airliner... no, it doesn't involve aliens or trans-dimensional portals, which makes it a little less exciting than some of what's been floating around.


"Aviation investigators and national security officials believe the plane flew for a total of five hours based on data automatically downloaded and sent to the ground from the Boeing Co 777's engines as part of a routine maintenance and monitoring programme"


"As part of its maintenance agreements, Malaysia Airlines transmits its engine data live to Rolls-Royce for analysis. The system compiles data from inside the 777's two Trent 800 engines and transmits snapshots of performance, as well as the altitude and speed of the jet."


"A total flight time of five hours after departing Kuala Lumpur means the Boeing 777 could have continued for an additional distance of about 2,200 nautical miles, reaching points as far as the Indian Ocean, the border of Pakistan or even the Arabian Sea, based on the jet's cruising speed."

http://my.news.yahoo.com/lost-mh370-flew-hours-vanishing-radar-reports-wall-052653561.html

[Biggus]

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/mas-official-disputes-rr-data-showing-mh370-flew-on-four-hours

KUALA LUMPUR, March 13 — A Malaysia Airlines spokesman today contested reports that Rolls Royce received bursts of engine information from missing flight MH370, insisting that the data link was severed the same moment the plane dropped off civilian radar.

For nearly every new piece of information so far, there is a retraction or obfuscation within hours. Right now, the facts appear to be as follows:

MH370 departed from KL at 0041 local time. Last ACARS tranmission was said to be at 0107, last radio contact was at 0121. An unknown contact was tracked until 0240. Two people on board were travelling on false passports, which apparently is not unheard of. ACARS data suggesting that the aircraft flew for several more hours are currently unsubstantiated.

[omarali50]

Could it be that the Bhumiputra administration of Malaysia is in worse shape than anyone had thought? Maybe a combination of British colonial law and order (and sahib-like appearances) and Chinese money had kept the reality of incompetence and confusion well hidden?
Just a thought.

[carl]

Biggus & Dayuhan:

You guys are on top of this. Have there been any reports about what kind of cargo/freight the aircraft was carrying? Another idle thought on my part.

[davidbfpo]

At this point, it is safe to say that we know exactly one thing with any certainty as to the whereabouts of Flight 370. It is almost definitely, quite probably, without much doubt, located somewhere within this one little greenish circle..

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/03/140313_FT_MalaysiaFlight.png.CROP.promo-mediumlarge.png

From:http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/13/malaysia_airlines_flight_missing_plane_search_area _grows_map.html

[davidbfpo]

Could it be that the Bhumiputra administration of Malaysia is in worse shape than anyone had thought? Maybe a combination of British colonial law and order (and sahib-like appearances) and Chinese money had kept the reality of incompetence and confusion well hidden?
Just a thought.

Omarali50,

A better, contemporary explanation why:
Why Malaysia Will Say Almost Nothing About the Missing Plane

See:http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-03-12/why-malaysia-will-say-almost-nothing-about-the-missing-flight

[Dayuhan]

WSJ has now issued a correction to the previous link... same link as above, but at the bottom of the page:


U.S. investigators suspect Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 flew for hours past the time it reached its last confirmed location, based on an analysis of signals sent through the plane's satellite-communication link designed to automatically transmit the status of onboard systems, according to people familiar with the matter. An earlier version of this article and an accompanying graphic incorrectly said investigators based their suspicions on signals from monitoring systems embedded in the plane's Rolls-Royce PLC engines and described that process.

There's also this:


In a CNN appearance on Thursday, the former National Transportation Safety Board vice-chairman Bob Frances called the WSJ story “remarkable”. In an interview with the Washington Post, he said:

“Andy Pasztor is a very reputable journalist who knows his stuff in aviation as much as anyone. For him to create this article out of whole cloth for me stretches credulity … So you don’t know where to go. I would go with what Andy said because I have great faith in him and he doesn’t have any political ax to grind, as do the Malaysians.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/13/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-media-claims

From the same link:


the signal came not from the engines but from a “satellite-communication link designed to automatically transmit the status of some onboard systems”. The paper is standing by the substance of its story, though, and Reuters and CNN are also quoting unnamed sources as saying that “pings” continued after 1.07am, with Reuters explaining:

The ‘pings’ equated to an indication that the aircraft’s maintenance troubleshooting systems were ready to communicate with satellites if needed, but no links were opened because Malaysia Airlines and others had not subscribed to the full troubleshooting service

and this, which is interestimng:


Two U.S. officials tell ABC News the U.S. believes that the shutdown of two communication systems happened separately on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. One source said this indicates the plane did not come out of the sky because of a catastrophic failure.

The data reporting system, they believe, was shut down 1:07 a.m. The transponder -- which transmits location and altitude -- shut down at 1:21 a.m.

This indicates it may well have been a deliberate act, ABC News aviation consultant John Nance said.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/malaysia-airliner-pinging-indication-crashed-indian-ocean/story?id=22894802

That would seem to indicate either coercion or pilot complicity, but at this point there's nowhere near enough information out to support anything but speculation.

The combination of the satellite pings and the time gap between the system shutdowns suggest there's more going on than was originally told, and that the Malaysian government is either not so well informed or has been holding back information. It's interesting that this stuff is coming from the US side. It does certainly suggest that the potential search area is, as David points out, a whole lot larger than initially thought.

I have heard nothing at all about cargo.

There has been some speculation that nations in the area are hesitant to reveal military radar data as it might mean revealing information about their capacities (or lack thereof) that they would rather keep private.

I wonder if there's some reason why the transponders can be manually shut off, rather than operating automatically any time the plane is airborne. I suspect that this may change, as it seems an invitation to problems.

[ganulv]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BinmefNCAAE2dEc.jpg (http://pic.twitter.com/FzVxSMWyra)

[carl]

I wonder if there's some reason why the transponders can be manually shut off, rather than operating automatically any time the plane is airborne. I suspect that this may change, as it seems an invitation to problems.

You have to be able to stop the transmission if the system is sending out incorrect information. And if it starts to burn you have to be able to shut off power.

[AmericanPride]

Since the aircraft was flying at night, is it possible that a malfunction could lead the pilots to losing their direction? I'm not familiar with the technical aspects of flying and aerial navigating. Is it also possible that a series of technical malfunctions or human error led to the sequential loss of navigation, transponder, and communication system(s) before the total loss of the aircraft (perhaps running out of fuel)? Does the 20-something minutes between the shut down of the data reporting system and the transponder preclude, say, the loss of cabin pressure and the aircraft operating on auto-pilot? And if the flight was deliberately taken off course, what destinations are in the Indian Ocean? Did they get lost? I'm also not familiar with the history of hi-jackings in this part of the world.

[Dayuhan]

You have to be able to stop the transmission if the system is sending out incorrect information. And if it starts to burn you have to be able to shut off power.

Apparently we also need a way to track a plane even if the transponders are shut down, willingly or under coercion, by the pilot. Seems like with the technology available today that ought to be possible, but WTFDIK?

[Biggus]

Biggus & Dayuhan:

You guys are on top of this. Have there been any reports about what kind of cargo/freight the aircraft was carrying? Another idle thought on my part.

There's a conspiracy theory doing the rounds that suggests that there was a large proportion of the staff of a semiconductor company on board, and that a competitor might have planted a bomb on board to assassinate them.


Since the aircraft was flying at night, is it possible that a malfunction could lead the pilots to losing their direction? I'm not familiar with the technical aspects of flying and aerial navigating. Is it also possible that a series of technical malfunctions or human error led to the sequential loss of navigation, transponder, and communication system(s) before the total loss of the aircraft (perhaps running out of fuel)? Does the 20-something minutes between the shut down of the data reporting system and the transponder preclude, say, the loss of cabin pressure and the aircraft operating on auto-pilot? And if the flight was deliberately taken off course, what destinations are in the Indian Ocean? Did they get lost? I'm also not familiar with the history of hi-jackings in this part of the world.

I don't yet buy into the hijacking theory. I don't see enough evidence just yet.

There's really not a lot that can go wrong in terms of navigation. Part of the pre-flight process is to set up the waypoints along the appropriate airway (think of it as an imaginary multi-level highway in the air) in the flight control system, and most airlines these days tend to make it SOP to do nearly everything on autopilot post-takeoff. Everything is done by checklist.

A very mild decompression loss would explain most of the unknowns reasonably well at this point. The scenario would effectively be that the crew would catch the onset of hypoxia early enough to start an emergency descent (spoilers and speedbrakes, close throttle, set the autopilot MCP to a lower altitude which might or might not initially have been FL295, hit HDG mode to change course and get out of the airway, transponder to 7700) but late enough to not go through the second part of the emergency descent checklist before succumbing. In this case, you'd have an aircraft that could fly until it ran out of fuel with no human input.

The transponder seems to be the most troubling aspect. Two other aircraft in the relevant timeframe experienced anomolies in their transponder output in a fairly small geographic area, KAL672 and CCA970. Some are suggesting perhaps an electronic warfare surface vessel might be responsible, but I don't really want to speculate too much on that. It might very well have been accidentally turned off in the rush to get the emergency descent procedures started, which would be within the realms of possibility. I'm neither familiar with the transponder in question nor MAS's checklists and I'm going from input from B777 crews from other airlines. It might very well be necessary to turn the transponder to standby before putting in the new code.

The ACARS data is one of the pivotal pieces of data right now. If it's true that there were data packets of any kind being sent from MH370 beyond 0107 local time, then the entire game changes in terms of searching for wreckage.

[carl]

American Pride:

There is probably a plain magnetic compass in the cockpit. Every airplane I've flown had one and there appears to be one in the 777 cockpit photos on the net. It was mandated on the smaller planes I'm familiar with and probably is on a 777 too.

If that didn't work I'll bet at least one of the pax had a hand held gps in their carry on bag. That would be good enough to find your way.

(The above is if the primary nav systems all fail. I should have said that.)

There have been at least two accidents that I know of where the crew and pax passed out due to oxygen deprevation due to depressurization. Both planes eventually crashed. But that probably doesn't account for the transponder not working.

Beyond that I don't know anything.

[Dayuhan]

Beyond that I don't know anything.

None of us do at this point, though the evidence that the plane may have been flying for some time after the last contact does provide a reasonable explanation for the failure of the search so far.

This quote:


U.S. officials said earlier that they have an "indication" the missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner may have crashed in the Indian Ocean and is moving the USS Kidd to the area to begin searching.

does not specify the nature of the "indication", but if it was sufficiently compelling to redeploy a destroyer it must be something fairly substantial.

[Biggus]

Apparently we also need a way to track a plane even if the transponders are shut down, willingly or under coercion, by the pilot. Seems like with the technology available today that ought to be possible, but WTFDIK?

The question isn't purely technological. It's also a question of whether the owners of the technology (ie, various defence forces) are willing to share with the civillian world in real time. I would be extremely surprised if at least some of the event wasn't tracked by Jindalee, for example.

[carl]

Apparently we also need a way to track a plane even if the transponders are shut down, willingly or under coercion, by the pilot. Seems like with the technology available today that ought to be possible, but WTFDIK?

You may be right. Biggus knows more about large jets than I so he might know.

[carl]

Biggus:

We have a gift for posting at the exact same time.

Do you know if they can backtrack and get an approximate position of a satcom transmission, sort of like triangulating?

[Biggus]

American Pride:

There is probably a plain magnetic compass in the cockpit. Every airplane I've flown had one and there appears to be one in the 777 cockpit photos on the net. It was mandated on the smaller planes I'm familiar with and probably is on a 777 too.

If that didn't work I'll bet at least one of the pax had a hand held gps in their carry on bag. That would be good enough to find your way.

(The above is if the primary nav systems all fail. I should have said that.)

There have been at least two accidents that I know of where the crew and pax passed out due to oxygen deprevation due to depressurization. Both planes eventually crashed. But that probably doesn't account for the transponder not working.

Beyond that I don't know anything.

Not only would they have a backup set of rudimentary aviation and navigation instrumentation, they have a lost-comms approach procedure for KL which they'd be very familiar with.

The pressurisation system is one of the checklist items, and if I recall correctly, it's a simple mechanical knob that you turn to increase or decrease the pressure. It's pretty unlikely for a crew to miss setting it up correctly on the ascent, so the question is what caused the depressurisation?

[Biggus]

You may be right. Biggus knows more about large jets than I so he might know.

I don't know about that. I just read a lot from the big jet drivers and look for solid explanations.


Biggus:

We have a gift for posting at the exact same time.

Do you know if they can backtrack and get an approximate position of a satcom transmission, sort of like triangulating?

I'm out of my depth on this question. I have three possible answers, though:
1. Yes 'they' do, but they're not sharing.
2. No, they don't.
3. They have the ability to do so, provided the transmission is live for x amount of time, and the nature of pinging a satellite with a few small packets of data precludes the ability to locate.

I did just notice this (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304185104579437573396580350?mod=WS J_hp_LEFTTopStories&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB1000 1424052702304185104579437573396580350.html%3Fmod%3 DWSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories):

The satellites also received speed and altitude information about the plane from its intermittent "pings," the people said. The final ping was sent from over water, at what one of these people called a normal cruising altitude. They added that it was unclear why the pings stopped. One of the people, an industry official, said it was possible that the system sending them had been disabled by someone on board.

Apparently ACARS does include location data. MAS did not subscribe, so I wonder whether the slow leak of this is simply because RR don't want to let on to everyone that they're monitoring their engines regardless of the wishes of the airlines.

[slapout9]

Why the aviation experts explain the engineering an technical aspects I will stick with my universal small wars, big wars, basic Police theory that People cause crimes and wars. in this case I say the backround of the flight crew stinks. Start with the pilot.

[ganulv]

Apparently ACARS does include location data. MAS did not subscribe, so I wonder whether the slow leak of this is simply because RR don't want to let on to everyone that they're monitoring their engines regardless of the wishes of the airlines.

Hmm. Perhaps this is metadata that the U.S. Intelligence Community collects as a matter of course?

[Biggus]

Why the aviation experts explain the engineering an technical aspects I will stick with my universal small wars, big wars, basic Police theory that People cause crimes and wars. in this case I say the backround of the flight crew stinks. Start with the pilot.

It's happened in the past a few times, so I'm open to the possibility. Do you have anything to add to the background of the flight crew beyond what you've said? All I can say to be aware of is that the Captain was incredibly experienced, the FO was reasonably experienced for an FO, and I know nothing of any other crew.

[Biggus]

Hmm. Perhaps this is metadata that the U.S. Intelligence Community collects as a matter of course?

I would say that you're probably correct.

The other question mark in my mind is the airworthiness of the aircraft. It had had all scheduled maintenance, it had been repaired properly after the accident a few years ago where it lost a wingtip (evidently, given the existence of data suggesting the aircraft remained airborne for several hours after last contact), and it's next scheduled trip to the maintenance shop was still little way off. On paper, it was perfectly serviceable.

MAS has a history of cutting their budget a bit fine, though. Not that long ago, they were caught landing at well under the required reserve of fuel on a regular basis at a UK airport, and were only allowed to continue to use the airport on condition of allowing the airport staff full access to not only raw fuelling data but also having staff present for fuelling events. Given that they were operating from home territory and heading for China (which is a little more lax than the UK in terms of ensuring compliance), I do wonder whether the ground crews missed an important item.

[slapout9]

It's happened in the past a few times, so I'm open to the possibility. Do you have anything to add to the background of the flight crew beyond what you've said? All I can say to be aware of is that the Captain was incredibly experienced, the FO was reasonably experienced for an FO, and I know nothing of any other crew.

Yes, who had motive,means and opportunity? Both the transponders were turned off. That took human action. Who had the means and opportunity to do that? IMO only the crew had those 2 . Now we need to find a motive and who had that motive.

[Biggus]

Yes, who had motive,means and opportunity? Both the transponders were turned off. That took human action. Who had the means and opportunity to do that? IMO only the crew had those 2 . Now we need to find a motive and who had that motive.

It's worthy of some consideration, but given the lack of information indicating malicious intent, I don't see much point throwing around accusations about the crew. That may change, though.

The slow decompression theory that I've found the most compelling thus far has some flaws. Firstly, the aircraft turned quite a bit more sharply than you'd expect it would to leave the airway. Secondly, there's a visible and audible warning to the crew. There is a precedent where a crew ignored such a warning and subsequently crashed (see Helios Airways Flight 522 for example). People do strange things when they're suffering from hypoxia, though.

Edit: For what little it's worth, I am slowly beginning to agree that this looks like a deliberate act. I'm not quite there yet, but it's on my mind.

[Biggus]

And this (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-radar-data-suggests-flight-path-1.2572287), released a few minutes ago:

'We are looking at sabotage, with hijack still on the cards,' senior Malaysian police official says

[Biggus]

After yet another day of information leak, denial, retraction and obfuscation, I have come to the conclusion that the mystery will ultimately only be solved by a fisherman in the middle of nowhere.

[slapout9]

It's worthy of some consideration, but given the lack of information indicating malicious intent, I don't see much point throwing around accusations about the crew.


Not throwing accusations at anyone in particular.... but any serious investigation should ''start" with the Pilot and work through the entire crew and then the passengers. They should look heavily at Financial,Medical(not just Psychological),Marriage,Religious,and Political stresses not just past work performance. They should pay special attention to the "Private" Life (and everybody has one) personal habits of the persons of interest.

And as usual my adult warning label! I could be all wrong!!!

[Dayuhan]

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 hijacked, official says

Investigators have concluded that one or more people with significant flying experience hijacked the missing Malaysia Airlines jet, switched off communication devices and steered it off-course, a Malaysian government official involved in the investigation said Saturday.

No motive has been established and no demands have been made known, and it is not yet clear where the plane was taken, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media. The official said that hijacking was no longer a theory.

"It is conclusive," he said.

http://ph.news.yahoo.com/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-hijacked--official-says-052949104.html

If that's true, the next question is whether they subsequently crashed, or whether they actually managed to land somewhere.

[Dayuhan]

This just keeps getting messier...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/15/malaysian-pm-diversion-of-missing-airliner-was-a-deliberate-act


The Malaysian prime minister says investigators now know that the missing Malaysian airliner’s communications were deliberately disabled and that it turned back from its flight to Beijing and flew across Malaysia.

A newly extended, multinational search stretching all the way from Kazakhstan to the southern Indian Ocean was underway on Saturday after satellite data indicated missing flight MH370 last made contact six hours after previously believed.


Malaysia’s aviation authorities are working with their international counterparts to help determine where exactly the plane may now be, Najib said, who added it was likely to be in one of two possible flight corridors: a northern corridor stretching from northern Thailand to the border of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, and a southern corridor stretching from Indonesia out towards the southern Indian Ocean.

The northern corridor would include some of the most inhospitable terrain on the planet and would be a very difficult place to search. It also crosses quite a few nations and several contested areas... is it not likely that an airliner flying off course and without transponder data would at least be noticed by somebody's air defense system, especially if it were flying along the India/China border, or over Kashmir? Would be good to have input from somebody who knows about these things. An arc from Kazakhstan to the southern Indian Ocean would include Afghanistan, Pakistan, potentially western Iran... but only if the aircraft flew over India, which you'd think would hardly go unnoticed.

If it went out over the southern Indian Ocean... big piece of water to search. No chance at all of finding anywhere to land, no target of opportunity, no realistic destination.

They will be investigating everyone on board, I'm sure, any idea of who hijacked it and why could make finding it a great deal easier.

Very strange all around.

[Biggus]

Apparently (http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/mh370-may-be-between-kazakhstan-and-south-indian-ocean-says-pm)there is now a possibility that the last ACARS transmission occurred somewhere between Thailand and Kazakhstan, or alternatively Indonesia to the southern Indian Ocean at 0811.

Dayuhan beat me to it :)

Edit: It's worth noting that as far as I am aware, no cargo manifest has been released.

[Dayuhan]

Interesting to see the graphic representation of the "corridors" in your link, though. I read "from northern Thailand to the border of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan" and imagined a route south of what's illustrated there. The route on that map goes straight over western China, and it's hard to see how the Chinese wouldn't have detected that... unless they did, and aren't talking about it?

The illustrated northern arc also seems incompatible with the earlier statements that the jet was headed toward the Andaman Islands... but at this point none of it really seems to fit. I hope whoever's running the search knows more than what's being released.

The southern arc seems to go absolutely nowhere but open ocean, between Diego Garcia and Western Australia.

Either this is all incredibly weird, or the information released to the public is incredibly deficient... maybe both.

[Dayuhan]

The image in question:

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b329/dayuhan/Two-Path1503_840_743_100.jpg (http://s22.photobucket.com/user/dayuhan/media/Two-Path1503_840_743_100.jpg.html)

NYT coverage:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?_r=0


The northern arc described by Mr. Najib passes through or close to some of the world’s most volatile countries that are home to insurgent groups, but also over highly militarized areas with robust air defense networks, some run by the U.S. military. The arc passes close to northern Iran, through Afghanistan and northern Pakistan, and through northern India and the Himalayan mountains and Myanmar. An aircraft flying on that arc would have to pass through air defense networks in India and Pakistan, whose mutual border is heavily militarized, as well as through Afghanistan, where the United States and other NATO countries have operated air bases for more than a decade.

Air bases near that arc include Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan, where the U.S. Air Force’s 455th Air Expeditionary Wing is based, and a large Indian air base, Hindon Air Force Station.


The southern arc, from Indonesia to the southern Indian Ocean, travels over open water with few islands stretching all the way to Antarctica. If the aircraft took that path, it may have passed near Australia’s Cocos (Keeling) Islands. These remote islands, with a population of fewer than 1,000 people, have a small airport. To the east of that route is Western Australia.

Explanation of how the arcs were derived:


The satellite communications box fitted on the plane is of an older generation and is not equipped with a global positioning system, the person said. But investigators have managed to calculate the distance between the “ping” from the plane and a stationary Inmarsat-3 satellite orbiting above the Equator and over the Indian Ocean. The satellite can “see” in an arc that stretches to the north and south of its fixed position, but without GPS it can only say how far away the ping is, not where it is coming from, the person said.

So if it went north, how did it avoid detection by military radar? If they took it south into empty ocean... why?

Very strange all around.

Another quote from the NYT article:


Mikael Robertsson, a co-founder of Flightradar24, a global aviation tracking service, said the way the plane’s communications were shut down pointed to the involvement of someone with considerable aviation expertise and knowledge of the air route, possibly a crew member, willing or unwilling.

The Boeing’s transponder was switched off just as the plane passed from Malaysian to Vietnamese air traffic control space, thus making it more likely that the plane’s absence from communications would not arouse attention, Mr. Robertsson said by telephone from Sweden.

“Always when you fly, you are in contact with air traffic control in some country,” he said. “Instead of contacting the Vietnam air traffic control, the transponder signal was turned off, so I think the timing of turning off the signal just after you have left Malaysian air traffic control indicates someone did this on purpose, and he found the perfect moment when he wasn’t in control by Malaysia or Vietnam. He was like in no-man’s country.”

[carl]

The reason I asked about the cargo/freight was because, as per Slap, maybe this is a robbery. Steal the plane. Land it somewhere. Make off with what it was carrying and, God help them, deal with those not in on it and the plane. Who knows too, if that was the case some gov functionaries could be in on it.

I didn't want to speculate like that before but this is so strange now that it can't hurt.

[Biggus]

It would certainly be a route from the south to a point along that northern arc. The apparent waypoint plots from earlier seemed to be a path that was at the edges of Malay and Thai military radar coverage.

*If* we're talking about a hijacking and a final known location along that northern 40 degree arc, and *if* the ACARS pings were half hourly, the final destination would be within 250nm of that arc. We'd also be talking about a group that knew exactly how to go about 'threading the needle', flying between radar coverage areas without being detected.

India and China are a bit of an issue. I don't know enough about China's real defence capability in the south west of their country, but I know India is actively intercepting unresponsive and unknown air contacts coming from Pakistan with at least reasonable competence and success as of Feb 24. Whether this vigilance is constant, I can't really say. You'd need some pretty good ELINT sources finding an optimum time to get through to anywhere from Laos to Iran without detection.

Anecdotally I am hearing that flights into China are now regularly carrying greater fuel loads due to local factors.

*If* we're not looking at a hijacking, or we're looking an an unsuccessful hijacking, I'd be picking the southern 40 degree arc as the place to search. This southern arc is going to be a bit of a nightmare to find wreckage in. Apparently, the JORN radar installation at Laverton in Western Australia would have coverage of a large part of that arc, but of course it isn't manned unless there is a heightened state of alert.


Edit: Something that bothers me with a lot of the reporting in regards to the transponder is the notion that the only explanation for turning a transponder off is nefarious. There are times when it's necessary, such as a malfunction or an electrical fire.

[Biggus]

I was puzzled as to why the remainder of the 40 degree circle was disregarded. I thought there might be an attempt to misdirect our attention away from Africa for whatever reason, but the explanation is much simpler. Here (http://www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~mark/personal/MH370/mh370.html)'s the apparent answer:

The Malaysian map shows that the SAR team had concluded that the last ping came from somewhere on this 40 degree circle but they ruled out parts of the circle in the far East and also most of the west half of the circle.

A examination of the coverage of the INMARSATs explains this. The last ping must have been picked up by IOR over the Indian Ocean but not by POR over the Pacific or AOR-E over the Atlantic. Hence bits of the red circle are not valid and we end up with the two arcs, also described by the PM as coridoors.

Effectively, had MH370 been at any other point on that circle, it would have been picked up by at least one other satellite.

[ganulv]

Thinking on what Slap has said, maybe there was a hijacking unrelated to Islamist terrorism or politics of any sort? Say, one or more of the crew members were part of a conspiracy to steal something on board and/or to kidnap (a) particular passenger(s)?

Part of the heist crew is supposed to be waiting at Penang to offload the goods and the pilot(s), but for whatever reason, the plane doesn’t end up landing there. If the crew had put together a SHTF plan, they change course, dial in the autopilot, and bail out over land, leaving the passengers aloft.* If not, they begin looking for somewhere else to set down.

*Though one would assume that passengers would have made phone calls after the hijackers exited, assuming they were not all suffering form hypoxia related to depressurization related to the hijacker(’)s(’) jump. But that invites the question of why no cell phone calls were made in any case. Maybe the hijacker(’)s(’) bagged them all up first thing? If they had thought to do that beforehand, I expect they had a Plan B in place.

[Dayuhan]

This morning's conspiracy theories...

From The Times of India:


Was Malaysia Airlines' Flight 370 hijacked with the chillingly murderous intent of crashing it into a high-value building in an Indian city in a re-run of al-Qaida's 9/11 attack on the US?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Was-Flight-370-hijacked-for-9/11-type-attack-in-India/articleshow/32106334.cms

From the Daily Mail:


Doomed airliner pilot was political fanatic: Hours before taking control of flight MH370 he attended trial of jailed opposition leader

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581817/Doomed-airliner-pilot-political-fanatic-Hours-taking-control-flight-MH370-attended-trial-jailed-opposition-leader-sodomite.html#ixzz2w8TI7BVf

The latter might seem more credible if it didn't come from a notoriously unreliable source.

From Biggus:


I was puzzled as to why the remainder of the 40 degree circle was disregarded. I thought there might be an attempt to misdirect our attention away from Africa for whatever reason, but the explanation is much simpler. Here's the apparent answer:


The Malaysian map shows that the SAR team had concluded that the last ping came from somewhere on this 40 degree circle but they ruled out parts of the circle in the far East and also most of the west half of the circle.

A examination of the coverage of the INMARSATs explains this. The last ping must have been picked up by IOR over the Indian Ocean but not by POR over the Pacific or AOR-E over the Atlantic. Hence bits of the red circle are not valid and we end up with the two arcs, also described by the PM as coridoors.

Effectively, had MH370 been at any other point on that circle, it would have been picked up by at least one other satellite.

I was under the impression that the arcs were defined by the distance between the satellite and the aircraft, which was the only information they were able to deduce from the pings. The arcs drawn suggest that the distance remained fairly consistent through the period. Knowing the presumed route, the duration of the flight, and approximate speed might get them somewhere. I haven't seen anyone comparing the duration of the flight (as determined by the pigs, apparently 7 hrs) with the range of the aircraft with the fuel it had loaded. If the two are similar it might suggest that the aircraft flew until it ran out of fuel, a scenario consistent with the "disabled crew" scenarios discussed earlier. The southern arc, with the jet flying off into an empty expanse of ocean, might also be consistent with a disabled crew, possibly after a struggle. Flying a jet off to empty ocean with no possible place to land or attack would to me suggest either a disabled crew or a hijacker is a very disturbed frame of mind, but WTFDIK?

Here's an even weirder one: do the engines ping any time they are running, or only when the plane is airborne? If they sent regular pings for 7 hrs, and the pings remained at a relatively consistent distance from the satellite... could the plane have been on the ground for much or part of that time? It seems most peculiar that for 7 hrs the jet would follow an arc that kept it at a consistent distance from the satellite, but everything about this is most peculiar.

It will be interesting to see what more informed speculations emerge. I assume that the specialist aviation writers are running the new info past their networks and we'll see some analysis emerging by and by.

If it did go down at sea, it will take luck to find it... big piece of ocean, and the wreckage has had a week to disperse and sink.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I remember a made for TV movie when I was a kid about a series of plane disappearances. Three planes were taken and disappeared. The actual plot was to use commercial planes loaded with a nuclear weapon on a commercial route into the US replacing an existing plane that would be blown up over the Atlantic. The stolen commercial plane would then take its place on the flight path allowing the plane to fly in and land without raising any suspicion.

I thought about posting this some time back but thought you all would think me crazy (well, crazier than you already do). However, in this case, based on where the plane was last seen, I am thinking that maybe the target is Russia and not the US.

Of course, this is about as crazy as the lady who thinks Tesla company employees are cloaking the plane. Still, thought I would throw it out.

If all you wanted to do was run the plane into something you could have done that without all this effort. If you were planning on using the plane as a weapon the only reason to steal it would be so that you could land it and either change the passengers or the cargo.

[Dayuhan]

The problem with any scenario involving landing the aircraft is a serious lack of places to land a plane that size along the suggested routes, unless we assume official complicity somewhere along the way.

Seems like we have either an incredibly devious plot that's still unfolding, or a somewhat less devious plot that went horribly wrong somewhere along the way. Or, of course, something else altogether...

[carl]

I am not familiar with that part of the world but are there any dry lake beds there? If there are they make dandy landing fields. Also Desert One wasn't an actual airstrip so there may be more areas to set down than just concrete strips.

[Dayuhan]

Desert One was handling EC-130s and helicopters, not a civilian airliner... and things didn't exactly go well there.

A friend who flies for FedEx told me that landing an airliner anywhere other than a suitable airport would be possible in theory but with incredibly high risk. Of course they could have had a go at it. Also true that in an area like a dry lake bed concealing an airliner from satellite surveillance would be challenging, to say the least.

I suspect that the truth will be eventually turn out to be more mundane than most of the scenarios being thrown around here, but it certainly is a very bizarre incident.

PS: Looking at the ruggedness and isolation of the terrain on that northern arc, and the expanse of ocean on the southern, I have to pity whoever is tasked with running a search. What a nightmare.

[TheCurmudgeon]

So one of the communications systems was shut down early. From the BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26591056):


Mr Razak told a news conference that new satellite evidence shows "with a high degree of certainty" that the one of the aircraft's communications systems - the Aircraft and Communications Addressing and Reporting System - was disabled just before it had reached the east coast of Malaysia.

ACARS is a service that allows computers aboard the plane to "talk" to computers on the ground, relaying in-flight information about the health of its systems.

Shortly afterwards, near the cross-over point between Malaysian and Vietnamese air traffic controllers, the plane's transponder - which emits an identifying signal - was switched off, he said.

According to a military radar, the aircraft then turned and flew back over Malaysia before heading in a north-west direction.

A satellite was able to pick up a signal from the plane until 08:11 local time - more than seven hours after it lost radar contact - although it was unable to give a precise location, Mr Razak said.

I bet whomever let loose that there was another communications system in the plane that continued to transmit is kicking themselves. And if the plane did land, they will want to disable that system before it takes off again.

I figure the odds of it successfully lading are slime, but still it seems like a lot of trouble to go through if this were any normal hijacking or terrorist plot. If it was going to be flown into something that I would suspect that someone would have taken credit by now. Since there does not appear to be anyone claiming responsibility I am speculating that events have not fully run their course.

[slapout9]

Remember Korean flight 007 that was shot down by the Russian Air Force in the 1980's? The President released a recording of the Russian fighter pilot talking....and that recording was made by the NSA with 1970's(maybe 1960's) technology. Can you imagine the data they have with today's tech? Much is yet to be revealed about this incident because it is still in motion!

[Biggus]

I was under the impression that the arcs were defined by the distance between the satellite and the aircraft, which was the only information they were able to deduce from the pings. The arcs drawn suggest that the distance remained fairly consistent through the period. Knowing the presumed route, the duration of the flight, and approximate speed might get them somewhere. I haven't seen anyone comparing the duration of the flight (as determined by the pigs, apparently 7 hrs) with the range of the aircraft with the fuel it had loaded. If the two are similar it might suggest that the aircraft flew until it ran out of fuel, a scenario consistent with the "disabled crew" scenarios discussed earlier. The southern arc, with the jet flying off into an empty expanse of ocean, might also be consistent with a disabled crew, possibly after a struggle. Flying a jet off to empty ocean with no possible place to land or attack would to me suggest either a disabled crew or a hijacker is a very disturbed frame of mind, but WTFDIK?

Here's an even weirder one: do the engines ping any time they are running, or only when the plane is airborne? If they sent regular pings for 7 hrs, and the pings remained at a relatively consistent distance from the satellite... could the plane have been on the ground for much or part of that time? It seems most peculiar that for 7 hrs the jet would follow an arc that kept it at a consistent distance from the satellite, but everything about this is most peculiar.

It will be interesting to see what more informed speculations emerge. I assume that the specialist aviation writers are running the new info past their networks and we'll see some analysis emerging by and by.

If it did go down at sea, it will take luck to find it... big piece of ocean, and the wreckage has had a week to disperse and sink.

The ping arc is certainly one based on deducing the latency of the ping itself, but it's also only based on the 'final' ping. No other information regarding the pings between loss of contact and the final ping have been released. The arc is simply a line of possible points where MH370 issued the final ping, not the route itself.

Regarding whether or not ACARS attempts to check for the presence of a satallite connection on the ground, I do not know. I do know that the ELT is tied into a sensor that detects weight on the landing gear, I know that it would not be overly difficult to build similar functionality into ACARS, but I also know that until now ACARS has not entirely been well understood by many people.

ACARS reports APU status normally when it's reporting back to RR, apparently. A landing, engine shutdown to stop the ACARS pinging, refuel and take off again scenario either requires ground power to start the aircraft, or the APU has to be running when the engines are shut down. I wouldn't discount it if we're looking at a hijacking, the sort of effort that seems to have been gone to would suggest that whatever group was involved would have enough logistical tail to accomplish a landing, fuelling, possible ground power and take off.

There are a few other things to consider. Fuel load would have been enough for a hair over eight hours of flight, including reserves. Now, the way reserves are calculated, part of the calculation is that the aircraft will burn a portion of that reserve in a holding pattern at an alternate airfield in case the original destination is unavailable. In such a holding pattern, fuel burn per distance travelled is higher (an aircraft will burn more fuel travelling at a significantly lower speed and altitude). Using this fuel in cruise would attain significantly greater range. We don't know enough about the fuel load in this case, so it's one of those things to keep in the back of your mind.

[Biggus]

So one of the communications systems was shut down early. From the BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26591056):



I bet whomever let loose that there was another communications system in the plane that continued to transmit is kicking themselves. And if the plane did land, they will want to disable that system before it takes off again.

I figure the odds of it successfully lading are slime, but still it seems like a lot of trouble to go through if this were any normal hijacking or terrorist plot. If it was going to be flown into something that I would suspect that someone would have taken credit by now. Since there does not appear to be anyone claiming responsibility I am speculating that events have not fully run their course.

There's a lot of conflicting information coming from the Malaysians, partly because they aren't really aware of the capabilities of some of the equipment on MAS planes and partly because I don't think that they've managed to get their own departments to communicate with each other.

MAS opted out of the full ACARS suite. They 'knew' that what was installed could be switched off from the cabin, they didn't know that doing so didn't really fully disable ACARS from communicating with the outside world. Normally, most ACARS data would be handled by HF or VHF ground stations. This is probably what they're talking about, but what they didn't know was that the SATCOM uplink wasn't really completely disabled, it just wasn't sending useful data.

In layman's terms, imagine your email software checking for mail periodically. It'll contact the mail server, but no data will be exchanged beyond a 'I'm still here' bit of data.

RR and Boeing weren't really prepared for all their clients to suddenly become aware that ACARS might be reporting more than was thought, so we saw a few days' worth of confusion over that issue, with nobody really wanting to officially comment.

What we're really seeing is either masterful information flow management (not by the Malaysians), or it's genuine confusion on everyone's part. Why release only the final ping arc? Why not the others? Why is ACARS data being released in the last day and not a couple of days earlier?

[former_0302]

Why release only the final ping arc? Why not the others? Why is ACARS data being released in the last day and not a couple of days earlier?

Really interesting point. I would imagine that the other arcs may indicate a route. If the plane was on a certain arc at one time, then another arc the next time, another the next, etc., you might be able to look at where straight lines intersect the circles on successive tangents and figure out the plane's route (presuming, of course, that the plane was flying in a straight line). Which may be more information than they're comfortable with releasing, for any number of reasons...

[Biggus]

Really interesting point. I would imagine that the other arcs may indicate a route. If the plane was on a certain arc at one time, then another arc the next time, another the next, etc., you might be able to look at where straight lines intersect the circles on successive tangents and figure out the plane's route (presuming, of course, that the plane was flying in a straight line). Which may be more information than they're comfortable with releasing, for any number of reasons...

I'm sure that a few days ago, someone spent a lot of CPU cycles modelling all the potential flight plans based upon the other pings. There's also public domain data about the initial waypoints MH370 followed when it turned out of the airway.

[slapout9]

Just read an unconfirmed report that the plane was shadowing other Aircraft in an attempt to hide it's flightpath, similar to the process used by drug smugglers. Supposedly the Maylaysian government has known this for some time.

[Biggus]

Just read an unconfirmed report that the plane was shadowing other Aircraft in an attempt to hide it's flightpath, similar to the process used by drug smugglers. Supposedly the Maylaysian government has known this for some time.

That one is a few days old and doesn't have much credibility. Defence radars would just pick up an even bigger radar return if they were doing so. We're not talking about B2s here, these things stand out like the proverbial dog's bollocks to even relatively simple radar systems.

Something that I've just become aware of is that there's a hatch in the cabin that would allow access to half of the E&E bay.

[Dayuhan]

A London tabloid reported yesterday that the pilot was a strong supporter of the PKR (Malaysian opposition political party) and its leader Anwar Ibrahim. Anwar's acquittal (on sodomy charges, generally believed to be trumped up) was overturned Friday, just before the flight departed, sending him back to prison. The theory was that the pilot could have been angry enough to go off (or into) the deep end. The problem with that is that the whole event seems well planned, not impulse-driven, and of course if the hijacking were meant as a political statement, you'd expect to see some kind of a political statement coming out of it. Of course it's possible that a struggle in the course of events left the crew disabled and the aircraft flying out to sea before a statement could be delivered.

The PKR has released a statement saying that the pilot was an active member of the party, but denying that he attended Anwar's trial:

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-color-red-missing-mh370-font-pilot-is-pkr-member-1.515965

The PKR is a moderate, multi-racial, secular reformist party campaigning primarily on issues centered on corruption and equal justice, with strong support among urban, educated, relatively affluent Malaysians, a bracket to which a senior MAS pilot would belong. One takeaway from the revelation is that if the pilot was active PKR he was almost certainly not involved with Islamic extremist groups, the two are at opposite political poles.

Decent summary of what's currently been released:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700790/Malaysian-Airlines-MH370-how-much-do-we-really-know.html


A source familiar with US assessments of satellite signals said it appeared most likely the plane turned south over the Indian Ocean, where it would presumably have run out of fuel and crashed.

The other interpretation was that MH370 flew to the north-west and headed over India.

But it is unlikely the plane flew here for any length of time. India has strong radar coverage that should have allowed authorities there to intercept the plane.

The southern route seems to me most compatible with a "disabled crew" scenario, while the northern fits the "incredibly devious plot" scenarios.

Malaysia officially requests assistance from practically everybody, as well they might:

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/03/16/Missing-MH370-seeking-help-15-countries/


Malaysian officials are contacting their counterparts in at least 15 countries located along the northern and southern corridors where MH370 could have flown along to seek assistance.

In a press statement Sunday, the Transport Ministry said the countries included Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, China, Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Australia and France.

"Officials are requesting assistance (from these countries)," the statement said, adding that Malaysia was also asking related countries to provide further assistance including satellite data and analysis, ground-search capabilities, radar data and maritime and air assets.

Malaysian officials were currently discussing with all partners how best to deploy assets along the two corridors.

"Both the northern and southern corridors are being treated with equal importance."

Pakistan denies that the plane is in their territory:

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/03/16/Missing-MH370-pakistan-denies-plane-in-territory/

I've limited to nonexistent trust in Pakistani authorities, but in this case I suspect they are right: it is hard to see how the plane could have flown there without triggering some kind of response from Indian and/or Chinese air defense systems.

[Dayuhan]

The ping arc is certainly one based on deducing the latency of the ping itself, but it's also only based on the 'final' ping. No other information regarding the pings between loss of contact and the final ping have been released. The arc is simply a line of possible points where MH370 issued the final ping, not the route itself.

Wouldn't the flight time tend to disqualify the parts of the arc closest to the latest known sighting, unless of course the aircraft doubled back at some point?


I wouldn't discount it if we're looking at a hijacking, the sort of effort that seems to have been gone to would suggest that whatever group was involved would have enough logistical tail to accomplish a landing, fuelling, possible ground power and take off.

That would be quite an accomplishment, given the extremely rugged and isolated terrain along the northern arc. Even for a fully resourced government it would be an expensive and time-consuming task. These are also not permissive environments for either air or ground movement, and to pull it off without alerting local authority (unless of course local authority is complicit) would be a real challenge.

Assuming a hijack, I'd guess the most probable scenario is a hijacking gone bad, meaning whatever events did not go according to plan and the plane crashed. If whoever did this actually has managed to get the plane on the ground, undetected, and is preparing it for further use... that would be disconcerting, as it would suggest an extraordinarily competent, organized, well prepared group, the kind that is a lot more common in the movies than in real life.

[davidbfpo]

Yesterday I had an outlandish idea, since this thread has raised many points here goes.

If the flight headed into the Indian Ocean there are very few capable landing fields. One comes to mind, Diego Garcia (British Indian Ocean Territory). Which has a large US military presence and presumably regular flights in and out that routinely scan their routes.

I don't think the flight landed there, that really would be outlandish.:wry:

[Dayuhan]

When I first saw the map with the north and south arcs I idly wondered whether the southern arc would have entered the radar coverage of Diego Garcia, or of Australian military installations. I don't suppose they'll tell us, though the US suggestions that the southern arc is more probable might possibly based on information they do not wish to specifically divulge.

[Dayuhan]

This one is up there with the alien abduction and supernatural intervention theories...

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1753.htm


Russia “Puzzled” Over Malaysia Airlines “Capture” By US Navy

A new report circulating in the Kremlin today prepared by the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces (GRU) states that Aerospace Defence Forces (VKO) experts remain “puzzled” as to why the United States Navy “captured and then diverted” a Malaysia Airlines civilian aircraft from its intended flight-path to their vast and highly-secretive Indian Ocean base located on the Diego Garcia atoll.


Flight 370 was already under GRU “surveillance” after it received a “highly suspicious” cargo load that had been traced to the Indian Ocean nation Republic of Seychelles, and where it had previously been aboard the US-flagged container ship MV Maersk Alabama.

What first aroused GRU suspicions regarding the MV Maersk Alabama, this report continues, was that within 24-hours of off-loading this “highly suspicious” cargo load bound for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, the two highly-trained US Navy Seals assigned to protect it, Mark Daniel Kennedy, 43, and Jeffrey Keith Reynolds, 44, were found dead under “suspicious circumstances.”

Both Kennedy and Reynolds, this report says, were employed by the Virginia Beach, Virginia-based maritime security firm The Trident Group which was founded by US Navy Special Operations Personnel (SEAL’s) and Senior US Naval Surface Warfare Officers and has long been known by the GRU to protect vital transfers of both atomic and biological materials throughout the world.

Upon GRU “assests” confirming that this “highly suspicious” cargo was aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 on 8 March, this report notes, Moscow notified China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) of their concerns and received “assurances” that “all measures” would be taken as to ascertain what was being kept so hidden when this aircraft entered into their airspace.

Now where did I put that tinfoil helmet...

[Biggus]

Wouldn't the flight time tend to disqualify the parts of the arc closest to the latest known sighting, unless of course the aircraft doubled back at some point?
Not enough open source data to make the call on this. It could be anywhere along that arc, plus or minus 500nm, assuming ACARS remained pinging the satellite for as long as the aircraft remained intact. I would assume that it was closer to the Kazakhstan end than the Myanmar/Laos end.

What is nearly feasible is entering Chinese airspace over Myanmar where I'd expect the air search radars to be the weakest, and fly on the north side of the defences through western China.



That would be quite an accomplishment, given the extremely rugged and isolated terrain along the northern arc. Even for a fully resourced government it would be an expensive and time-consuming task. These are also not permissive environments for either air or ground movement, and to pull it off without alerting local authority (unless of course local authority is complicit) would be a real challenge.
It would be a nearly unthinkable accomplishment. We're talking about a very well prepared makeshift runway in as you say extremely rugged terrain with quantities of fuel that would take literally months to transport and then store on site, with a team of people who know what they're doing in regards to ground power, fuelling, approach guidance and marshalling, not to mention several hijackers who are intimately familiar with approaches to very basic airstrips in the incredibly difficult flying conditions native to the areas we're looking at. All the while, avoiding air search radars and any and all outside contact with the world, verbal, electronic, visual or otherwise.

It's not very likely.


Assuming a hijack, I'd guess the most probable scenario is a hijacking gone bad, meaning whatever events did not go according to plan and the plane crashed. If whoever did this actually has managed to get the plane on the ground, undetected, and is preparing it for further use... that would be disconcerting, as it would suggest an extraordinarily competent, organized, well prepared group, the kind that is a lot more common in the movies than in real life.

I'm not anywhere near ready to accept that the aircrew were involved in the hijacking, if a hijacking is what has occurred. The Captain is political and well educated, but we're talking I-want-more-democracy political, not America-is-the-Great-Satan political. He evidently loved his job, he (like thousands of other pilots) had a pretty incredible home simulator setup which the media seems to think is some sort of indicator of suspicion (because obviously nobody in the media has that sort of passion for their own work), and he's lived in Malaysia long enough to have had plenty to be upset about before in regards to Anwar Ibrahim.

I don't yet know enough about the First Officer to form a proper opinion, but what I've learned thus far has not really raised any red flags to me.

So we're left with the inhabitants of the cabin, including two large parties (Freescale employees and a group of prominent Chinese artists), ten cabin crew (which may not include an MAS engineer assigned to Beijing), a couple of people travelling on false passports and an Uighar gentleman with some previous interest in flight simulation.

My own speculation is as follows, and it is by no means compelling or perfect:

I mentioned previously that part of the E&E bay was accessible from inside the cabin. It requires a proprietary screwdriver design to access, but once accessed, it would be possible to pull all the circuit breakers you could possibly need to shut down the transponder and other various systems (including the VHF component of ACARS) fairly quietly. It'd also be a good opportunity to pull the necessary circuit breaker for the pressurization system. In doing so, you'd have roughly 12 minutes before hypoxia set in, but after that happened (assuming you had bottled air), the aircraft would be all yours.

12 minutes isn't enough time from the shutoff of the transponder to the last ATC voice contact, although not all the breakers need to be pulled at once. I would have expected the cabin pressurization breaker to be the first thing to pull, though. In any case, it's entirely possible for the crew to not know about it, and someone with engineering credentials and an MAS uniform would get access in literally seconds without anyone batting an eyelid.

This all assumes that the passengers aren't the objective, and given the lack of a list of demands, I'd be inclined to believe that this is the case.

Of course, it could be a suicide attempt by a Captain or First Officer, it could be a takeover gone wrong (which would require E&E bay access to kill the transponder and ACARS VHF system 20 minutes prior to the takeover), and it could still be a mechanical disaster (except that saying 'goodnight' to the ATC after the transponder and ACARS VHF system are offline is a worry).

[Biggus]

Yesterday I had an outlandish idea, since this thread has raised many points here goes.

If the flight headed into the Indian Ocean there are very few capable landing fields. One comes to mind, Diego Garcia (British Indian Ocean Territory). Which has a large US military presence and presumably regular flights in and out that routinely scan their routes.

I don't think the flight landed there, that really would be outlandish.:wry:

I had the exact same though and came to exactly the same conclusion.


When I first saw the map with the north and south arcs I idly wondered whether the southern arc would have entered the radar coverage of Diego Garcia, or of Australian military installations. I don't suppose they'll tell us, though the US suggestions that the southern arc is more probable might possibly based on information they do not wish to specifically divulge.

Very, very unlikely that the JORN network will have much to show, given it's not staffed adequately at the best of times.




Now where did I put that tinfoil helmet...

Speaking of Russians and tinfoil hats, one of my early thoughts was that this might have been a Russian job to take the focus off Crimea.

[Biggus]

Something may have been found (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.defencenet.gr%2Fdefence%2Fitem% 2Fa%25CF%2581%25CF%2587%25CE%25AD%25CF%2582-%25CE%25BC%25CE%25B1%25CE%25BB%25CE%25B1%25CE%25B9 %25CF%2583%25CE%25AF%25CE%25B1%25CF%2582-%25CE%25B6%25CE%25B7%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF%25CF%258D %25CE%25BD-%25CE%25B2%25CE%25BF%25CE%25AE%25CE%25B8%25CE%25B5 %25CE%25B9%25CE%25B1-%25CE%25BA%25CE%25B1%25CE%25B9-%25CE%25B1%25CF%2580%25CF%258C-%25CE%25AC%25CE%25BB%25CE%25BB%25CE%25B5%25CF%2582-%25CF%2587%25CF%258E%25CF%2581%25CE%25B5%25CF%2582-%25CE%25B3%25CE%25B9%25CE%25B1-%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF%25CE%25BD-%25CE%25B5%25CE%25BD%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF%25CF%2580 %25CE%25B9%25CF%2583%25CE%25BC%25CF%258C-%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF%25CF%2585-%25CE%25BC%25CF%2580%25CF%258C%25CE%25B9%25CE%25BD %25CE%25B3%25CE%25BA-777).

New Commission takes thriller disappearing fatal Boeing 777 as reportedly the Greek ship "Elka Athina 'interests shipowner Karnezi took position on the existence of objects at sea in the Straits of Malacca!

Specifically, a few hours ago got a message from a coastal station of Indonesia with position: width 0551 length 09657.5 northern and eastern that found in suitcases belonging to passengers probably fatal flight of Malaysia Airlines.

Master of Elka Athina is Dimitris Zampelis and second officer Dimitris Karagiannis.
Department news defencenet.gr

Edit: For some reason, the direct link doesn't work. There's a story under the main story with Elka Athina in the title, that should take you to the right spot.

[Dayuhan]

Not enough open source data to make the call on this. It could be anywhere along that arc, plus or minus 500nm, assuming ACARS remained pinging the satellite for as long as the aircraft remained intact. I would assume that it was closer to the Kazakhstan end than the Myanmar/Laos end.

I would assume the same, though getting to the Kazakhstan end of the northern arc would mean flying over Tibet and southern Xinjiang, areas where China faces security issues and is presumably fairly alert. How attentive they are to air traffic already inside the border I do not, of course, know.


I'm not anywhere near ready to accept that the aircrew were involved in the hijacking, if a hijacking is what has occurred. The Captain is political and well educated, but we're talking I-want-more-democracy political, not America-is-the-Great-Satan political. He evidently loved his job, he (like thousands of other pilots) had a pretty incredible home simulator setup which the media seems to think is some sort of indicator of suspicion (because obviously nobody in the media has that sort of passion for their own work), and he's lived in Malaysia long enough to have had plenty to be upset about before in regards to Anwar Ibrahim.

I don't yet know enough about the First Officer to form a proper opinion, but what I've learned thus far has not really raised any red flags to me.

That's how it looked to me as well... which would mean somebody else who knew a whole lot about flying and about that airplane was on board.


My own speculation is as follows, and it is by no means compelling or perfect:

Better than a lot of what's floating around out there...


I mentioned previously that part of the E&E bay was accessible from inside the cabin. It requires a proprietary screwdriver design to access, but once accessed, it would be possible to pull all the circuit breakers you could possibly need to shut down the transponder and other various systems (including the VHF component of ACARS) fairly quietly.

Do you think opening the E&E bay or interfering with circuit breakers would trigger an alert in the cabin?


It'd also be a good opportunity to pull the necessary circuit breaker for the pressurization system. In doing so, you'd have roughly 12 minutes before hypoxia set in, but after that happened (assuming you had bottled air), the aircraft would be all yours.

If someone tried that and made a mistake, could they end up unconscious along with everyone else? Remote, of course, but so is everything else about this.

Still seems to me that either whatever happened either went wrong and produced a catastrophic end, or somebody successfully executed a very audacious and very difficult plan.


This all assumes that the passengers aren't the objective, and given the lack of a list of demands, I'd be inclined to believe that this is the case.

That seems likely to me as well, unless something went wrong before demands could be issued. Theories about an attempt to steal cargo or kidnap a specific passenger would presume an extraordinarily valuable person or cargo, and seem pretty improbable.


Of course, it could be a suicide attempt by a Captain or First Officer, it could be a takeover gone wrong (which would require E&E bay access to kill the transponder and ACARS VHF system 20 minutes prior to the takeover), and it could still be a mechanical disaster (except that saying 'goodnight' to the ATC after the transponder and ACARS VHF system are offline is a worry).

It could be a lot of things, all of them very strange. I still suspect that the eventual explanation will turn out to be less arcane than most of the theories, and will involve a screw up by somebody at some point in the chain... but that's just my nature.

[Biggus]

Do you think opening the E&E bay or interfering with circuit breakers would trigger an alert in the cabin?
Accessing the E&E bay wouldn't have tripped any alarms AFAIK. Disabling the transponder and ACARS VHF systems would open up a few possibilities for the crew to discover and become concerned about. There would be a warning message to notify the crew that the TCAS system which is integrated with the transponder, and this warning would be displayed on the screens in front of the pilots. It could be missed. Maybe. For 20 minutes or more, I don't know. If everything else was normal and this was the only issue to deal with, they'd take action in seconds. If there were other problems to be dealt with, once out of the airway it might become the last item on a long list of other problems to overcome.

I keep coming back to hypoxia and the strange things people do when hypoxic.


If someone tried that and made a mistake, could they end up unconscious along with everyone else? Remote, of course, but so is everything else about this.
Yes, quite easily. In fact, I suspect that even on bottled air, if the aircraft didn't either repressurize or decend fairly rapidly, anyone trying this would probably be in trouble.


That seems likely to me as well, unless something went wrong before demands could be issued. Theories about an attempt to steal cargo or kidnap a specific passenger would presume an extraordinarily valuable person or cargo, and seem pretty improbable.

All we know of the cargo now is that it is not hazardous. There's speculation that the plane was carrying 50 fewer passengers than it normally would because of the weight of the cargo, and there's speculation that the cargo is gold. But I'd expect at least a moderately large number of armed guards and possibly some diplomatic staff to be on board.




It could be a lot of things, all of them very strange. I still suspect that the eventual explanation will turn out to be less arcane than most of the theories, and will involve a screw up by somebody at some point in the chain... but that's just my nature.

I am of the same opinion. In the meantime, we just piece things together as they are released.

[Biggus]

Just noticed something about the timing. My understanding of the sequence of events was off.

ACARS was disabled at 0107, thirteen minutes passed between then and the final voice contact at 0120, and two minutes later, the transponder was switched off. I was under the impression that ACARS and the transponder were disabled at the same time.

The ACARS would bring up a warning, but knowing that the system would cut from VHF to SATCOM would probably result in the crew noticing the warning, checking that the SATCOM data link was still active and possibly disregarding it. It's not critical to the continued ability of the aircraft to remain airborne, so presumably it'd be written up and the ground crews could deal with it later.

Voice contact happens, everything seems more or less normal, two minutes later the transponder is off and the aircraft appears to be leaving the airway.

Seven hours later, the aircraft is still probably airborne somewhere over the southern Indian Ocean or somewhere from Thailand to Kazakhstan.

[Dayuhan]

Another question on fuel load and range...
\
It's been reported that after the the initial loss of contact the aircraft climbed quickly to 45,000 ft before descending. I assume that rapid ascent would be a fuel-intensive maneuver, but what impact would that have on expected flying time/range?

[Biggus]

Another question on fuel load and range...
\
It's been reported that after the the initial loss of contact the aircraft climbed quickly to 45,000 ft before descending. I assume that rapid ascent would be a fuel-intensive maneuver, but what impact would that have on expected flying time/range?

My understanding is that it is highly unlikely that a zoom climb to 45kft is possible. The same reports seem to indicate a sudden dive to 23kft too. We're talking F-15 performance here. Radar accuracy seems to be imperfect when it comes to tracking altitude.

Other than that, cruising at higher atltitudes tends to be better for fuel burn.

[Biggus]

I've just been made aware that the circuit breakers for the VHF are on the flight deck. SATCOM breakers are in the E&E bay.

But the SATCOM voice and data links can be shut down from the cockpit.

Something doesn't compute here. Why leave the SATCOM data up?

[ganulv]

Radar accuracy seems to be imperfect when it comes to tracking altitude.

Is barometric pressure used in some way to calculate the altitude? I ask because my handheld GPS uses BP to figure elevation, and they are invariably off vis-a-vis benchmarked elevation.

[TheCurmudgeon]

The pilot had his own at-home simulator (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/malaysian-authorities-examine-pilots-flight-simulator/2014/03/16/27b0d4ae-acea-11e3-a49e-76adc9210f19_story.html). That could have given him the ability to practice landings at various runways or to train others how to fly, depending on the capability of the simulator.

Slate (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/15/flight_370_disappearance_missing_airliner_apparent ly_flew_to_central_asia.html) is also taking a gander at the idea that the plane was take to be used for something else at a later date.


A chart released by the Malaysia government showed the aircraft’s range of possible positions based on the distance traveled by an electromagnetic ping detected by a satellite over the Indian Ocean at 8:11 a.m., at which point, apparently, the plane was still airborne but nearly out of fuel. It consists of two arcs (shown here in red), the northernmost of which goes from the northern border of Vietnam through western China to the eastern portion of Kyrgyzstan and includes the Chinese province of Xinjiang, heartland of the Uyghur ethnic minority.

A violent separatist Uyghur separatist movement is active in that area. Two weeks ago, eight knife-wielding Uyghur separatists attacked passengers at a train station in Xinjiang, killing 29 people. According to its manifest, 153 of the 227 passengers aboard MH370 are Chinese.

[Biggus]

Is barometric pressure used in some way to calculate the altitude? I ask because my handheld GPS uses BP to figure elevation, and they are invariably off vis--vis benchmarked elevation.

Possibly. Probably. I don't know.


The pilot had his own at-home simulator (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/malaysian-authorities-examine-pilots-flight-simulator/2014/03/16/27b0d4ae-acea-11e3-a49e-76adc9210f19_story.html). That could have given him the ability to practice landings at various runways or to train others how to fly, depending on the capability of the simulator.

Thousands of other high-hour pilots have the same thing. Hell, I have the same thing. It's not something he's hidden, it was all over his Facebook stuff, and he posted regularly within the flight sim community.

There's nothing nefarious about it. The guy loved flying. It's a job where people often love what they do.

[davidbfpo]

Where the plane could land:
Boeing 777s need a runway to be at least 5,000 feet long, limiting the number of possible sites within the 2,200 nautical mile-radius it is believed the plane could have flown from its last known position within the five hours it is thought to have remained airborne:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02853/grab_2853492c.jpg

Or link:http://project.wnyc.org/runways/

[davidbfpo]

Almost as if on demand Sajjad Badat apparently told a US court this week that:
four to five Malaysian men had been planning to take control of a plane, using a bomb hidden in a shoe to blow open the cockpit door....The supergrass said that he had met the Malaysian jihadists – one of whom was a pilot – in Afghanistan and given them a shoe bomb to use to take control of an aircraft.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700652/Malaysia-Airline-MH370-911-style-terror-allegations-resurface-in-case-of-lost-plane.html

Consider this - thanks to the article - Badat's meeting was just after 9/11, he has been in custody for sometime and was convicted in 2005, in the UK and has become a "super-grass". Yes, plots can take a long time to come to fruition, but I find this barely credible and am at a loss why he told the US court this snippet. Unless he was briefed to do so.

[Biggus]

Where the plane could land:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02853/grab_2853492c.jpg

Or link:http://project.wnyc.org/runways/

Long range cruise speed for a 777-200 is around 490kn. Max cruise is closer to 510kn. Five hours would add up to 550nm to that radius.

[Biggus]

Almost as if on demand Sajjad Badat apparently told a US court this week that:

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700652/Malaysia-Airline-MH370-911-style-terror-allegations-resurface-in-case-of-lost-plane.html

Consider this - thanks to the article - Badat's meeting was just after 9/11, he has been in custody for sometime and was convicted in 2005, in the UK and has become a "super-grass". Yes, plots can take a long time to come to fruition, but I find this barely credible and am at a loss why he told the US court this snippet. Unless he was briefed to do so.

Who benefits from the "revelation"?

Why conduct the attack now? Why not wait for something like the meeting at The Hague a couple of weeks from now, or the G20 in Brisbane in November?

I think your last sentence is quite reasonable.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Thousands of other high-hour pilots have the same thing. Hell, I have the same thing. It's not something he's hidden, it was all over his Facebook stuff, and he posted regularly within the flight sim community.

There's nothing nefarious about it. The guy loved flying. It's a job where people often love what they do.

You are right, there is nothing nefarious about it ... in and of itself. When tied to other facts it could indicate involvement and the ability to do simulations of flight paths and of landing on airstrips that he and never been to.

So yes, I believe it is relevant and should not be dismissed out of hand.

[CBCalif]

Which Radar Facility under whose control tracked the 777 after it checked out of Kuala Lumpur's control and after it turned off its transponder, noted its directional change and flight back over Malay Peninsular? To know it was the 777 they would have had to be tracking it prior to it turning off its transponder. If an on radar unidentified flight was traveling at high speed over their country and (supposedly) being tracked by the Malaysian military why did they not report trying to communicate with it and why would they not scramble interceptors to at least look at it? Which radar facility operated by whom tracked the supposed altitude changes of the 777 -- presumably using 3D height finder capable radar? Those reported altitude climbs and descents in the T.V. reported times seem implausible for the 777 air frame. And why didn't that tracking facility report attempting to contact the aircraft when watching such radical flight changes and if no answer send out interceptors to find out what was going on? If it was the Malaysian military they appear to be a rather unusually slow or no responding group???

[slapout9]

Article suggesting pilot supported homosexuality (illegal in Malaysia) also pilots Wife and Children moved out of their home the day before the plane disappeared. May have hijacked plane as a form of protest!



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-3248001

[TheCurmudgeon]

Slap,

Interesting that there appears to be no airfields in Pakistan capable of allowing a 777 to land.

On the more absurd side, I am putting my money on the Russian's theory (http://www.pisau.net/russia-puzzled-over-malaysia-airlines-mh370-capture-by-us-navy-prayformh370/)


A new report circulating in the Kremlin today prepared by the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces (GRU) states that Aerospace Defence Forces (VKO) experts remain “puzzled” as to why the United States Navy “captured and then diverted” a Malaysia Airlines civilian aircraft from its intended flight-path to their vast and highly-secretive Indian Ocean base located on the Diego Garcia atoll.

According to this report, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (also marketed as China Southern Airlines flight 748 through a codeshare) was a scheduled passenger flight from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to Beijing, China, when on 8 March this Boeing 777-200ER aircraft “disappeared” in flight with 227 passengers on board from 15 countries, most of whom were Chinese, and 12 crew members.

Interesting to note, this report says, was that Flight 370 was already under GRU “surveillance” after it received a “highly suspicious” cargo load that had been traced to the Indian Ocean nation Republic of Seychelles, and where it had previously been aboard the US-flagged container ship MV Maersk Alabama.

what first aroused GRU suspicions regarding the MV Maersk Alabama, this report continues, was that within 24-hours of off-loading this “highly suspicious” cargo load bound for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, the two highly-trained US Navy Seals assigned to protect it, Mark Daniel Kennedy, 43, and Jeffrey Keith Reynolds, 44, were found dead under “suspicious circumstances.”

And as long as I am throwing out wild theories, we are coming up on the second anniversary of bin Laden's death.

[slapout9]

Slap,

Interesting that there appears to be no airfields in Pakistan capable of allowing a 777 to land.



I don't believe any of that......(he/she/it flew 7 hours and landed some place stuff). The guy wanted to hijack the plane and something went wrong which cauesd the passengers to be killed (decompression or some other stuff way above my knowledge base) then it soaked into the pilots brain what he had done!!!!!:eek: and then drove the plane straight into the ocean.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I don't believe any of that......(he/she/it flew 7 hours and landed some place stuff). The guy wanted to hijack the plane and something went wrong which cauesd the passengers to be killed (decompression or some other stuff way above my knowledge base) then it soaked into the pilots brain what he had done!!!!!:eek: and then drove the plane straight into the ocean.

I would buy that if they had found wreckage. Even though I though of the old movie I had seen as a kid early on I did not believe that it was possible to steal an airline in flight. The Egyptian guy who just wanted to kill himself waited until the copilot was out of the cockpit and ran the plane into the ocean. This looks different.

I think whoever did this fully expected the authorities to assume the plane was lost off the coast of Vietnam. I believe they thought they had more time. Things are degrading. I find it just as likely that, whatever the plan was, once they had cut themselves off from the rest of the world they flew the plan into the Himalayas or the Indian Ocean. But if that is NOT the case, where does that leave us?

The movie I remember was based on a plot to fly nuclear weapons into the US. If the plane was flown to Pakistan, and if there was an errant nuclear weapon available (perhaps after those protecting bin Laden felt betrayed by their own government), and if they could manage to refuel the plane again somewhere in North Africa, it could make it to the US. That is WILD SPECULATION, I realize that ... but it is also a worse case scenario that should be considered.

... particularly since, at the moment, I live in Norther Virginia

As long as I am engaged in wild speculation, does anyone know if there is a way to depressurize the cabin from the cockpit ... killing all the passengers and crew who did not have an oxygen mask on?

[TheCurmudgeon]

But in all fairness, along the more mundane (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-search-expands-amid-focus-on-criminal-act/2014/03/15/66cf570c-ac52-11e3-a06a-e3230a43d6cb_story.html?hpid=z1).


So far no one has a solid “theory of the case,” as lawyers say. Mechanical malfunction — say, a sudden decompression that renders everyone onboard unconscious but lets the plane continue to fly — is still possible. A fire, perhaps from lithium batteries in the cargo hold, is another possibility.

But investigators suspect the disappearance could have been the result of a criminal act by a cockpit intruder or by someone in the crew. If that’s the case, there’s no obvious motive, no obvious perpetrator, no organization taking responsibility, no clear red flag about anyone onboard and nothing but speculation on how the hijacking or sabotage might have been carried out. The most essential question — where is the plane? — is unanswered.

One last thought from that article:


“Planes don’t just vanish and don’t just fall out of the sky. They go up and they come down,” he said.

I will admit, I like to stir the pot. But sometimes the pot needs to be stirred.

[Dayuhan]

Article suggesting pilot supported homosexuality (illegal in Malaysia) also pilots Wife and Children moved out of their home the day before the plane disappeared. May have hijacked plane as a form of protest!



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-3248001

This sounds like tabloid hysteria to me. Like many urban, educated Malaysians, he supported Anwar Ibrahim, an opposition leader who has been accused of being gay. Many, in and out of Malaysia, believe the charges were fabricated as a form of political harassment. The agenda of the PKR, Anwar's party, is generally multiracial (race issues are a big deal in Malaysia), pro-democracy, anti-corruption... what we would call moderate liberal.

It is worth noting that if he was solid PKR he was almost certainly not connected to any Islamic extremist group, opposite ends of the spectrum.

I would not give much weight to the wife and children angle until it's supported by more credible reporting.

[TheCurmudgeon]

only 47 more shopping days until the four year anniversary of bin Laden's death.

Yeah, that is a stretch, a long stretch, but what the heck. Might as well throw it out there.

[Dayuhan]

I don't believe any of that......(he/she/it flew 7 hours and landed some place stuff). The guy wanted to hijack the plane and something went wrong which cauesd the passengers to be killed (decompression or some other stuff way above my knowledge base) then it soaked into the pilots brain what he had done!!!!!:eek: and then drove the plane straight into the ocean.

The data pings from the aircraft confirm the flying time. Whether it landed or crashed at the end of that time, or whether anyone on board was conscious or even alive for much of that time, remains unknown, but we know how long it was in the air.

[Biggus]

You are right, there is nothing nefarious about it ... in and of itself. When tied to other facts it could indicate involvement and the ability to do simulations of flight paths and of landing on airstrips that he and never been to.

So yes, I believe it is relevant and should not be dismissed out of hand.

It's complete and utter garbage, if you're looking at the northern route. I've got exactly the same software as he does, and slightly better hardware. None of it could possibly be useful in developing the skillset to land a 777 on an airliner in the mountains of Central Asia. It shines as a procedural trainer (which was probably a good thing, considering he had a fairly low number of hours for a pilot with such a long career), but it does not help in learning how the aircraft will react to the unusual buffering and turbulence of an approach in the relevant areas.


Which Radar Facility under whose control tracked the 777 after it checked out of Kuala Lumpur's control and after it turned off its transponder, noted its directional change and flight back over Malay Peninsular? To know it was the 777 they would have had to be tracking it prior to it turning off its transponder. If an on radar unidentified flight was traveling at high speed over their country and (supposedly) being tracked by the Malaysian military why did they not report trying to communicate with it and why would they not scramble interceptors to at least look at it? Which radar facility operated by whom tracked the supposed altitude changes of the 777 -- presumably using 3D height finder capable radar? Those reported altitude climbs and descents in the T.V. reported times seem implausible for the 777 air frame. And why didn't that tracking facility report attempting to contact the aircraft when watching such radical flight changes and if no answer send out interceptors to find out what was going on? If it was the Malaysian military they appear to be a rather unusually slow or no responding group???

I've addressed the altitude discrepancies a page or so back.

I know that the Vietnamese ATC was going bonkers trying to contact MH370. That was perfectly reasonable, the last verbal comms was the handoff from Malay to Viet ATC. The Malaysians didn't expect further contact, the aircraft no longer appeared on their screen (due to the transponder being switched off), and it was no longer their responsibility to track the aircraft. For all the Malays knew as it was happening, the Vietnamese could have asked for a transponder code change.

As to why the Malaysians made no subsequent attempt to contact the now unknown contact on their primary radar (which would most likely belong to the RMAF), I'd be either looking for lack of communication between the civillian ATC and the owners of the primary radar, or I'd be wondering whether having unknown contacts pop up every now and then was a rare occurrance or not. I understand that it isn't uncommon.

As to the interceptors, we're talking about airspace that can be traversed in about fifteen minutes. I don't see the RMAF having a pair of FA-18s on Alert 5 24/7. They might manage a scramble with two hours' notice, but probably not much quicker.


Article suggesting pilot supported homosexuality (illegal in Malaysia) also pilots Wife and Children moved out of their home the day before the plane disappeared. May have hijacked plane as a form of protest!



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-3248001

And maybe (as quoted by the maid) the wife and kids went to their second home, as they might regularly do when hubby is away working.

You seriously think homosexuality is the real issue in the Anwar Ibrahim case?



The data pings from the aircraft confirm the flying time. Whether it landed or crashed at the end of that time, or whether anyone on board was conscious or even alive for much of that time, remains unknown, but we know how long it was in the air.

The other issue is the ELT. If the aircraft has crashed (and MAS kept up with the maintenance), there should be an ELT signal somewhere. It'd be hard to pick up in shallow waters, but if it's ended up at the south end of the southern arc, it'll eventually be found. It should be pinging away for 30 days, so we've got a couple of weeks left.

Of course, ELTs aren't perfect. They malfunction, they are battery powered and are therefore subject to being maintained regularly to keep them operational. They are sometimes set off by a hard landing.

There's still lots more to be divulged. We haven't been given the arcs for the other pings yet, and that is most likely for a good reason.

[Biggus]

As long as I am engaged in wild speculation, does anyone know if there is a way to depressurize the cabin from the cockpit ... killing all the passengers and crew who did not have an oxygen mask on?

I covered this yesterday.

Two ways to do it, either pull the circuit breaker in the E&E bay or just turn off the system on the overhead panel.

Bottled air at 40kft won't be enough to survive on for very long for anyone. 12 mins before the average person is dead in that environment.

[Dayuhan]

There's still lots more to be divulged. We haven't been given the arcs for the other pings yet, and that is most likely for a good reason.

Given the direction the investigation is going, I would not be surprised to see less and less information emerging.

[AmericanPride]

What fascinates me about this event is the many layers of open questions as well as the slow and poor response of the various governments involved. For example, nearly immediately a senior Malaysian officer stated that the plane returned to fly over the peninsula, but he was quickly rebuked by his own government and reversed himself, only to have his statement confirmed several days later. The Chinese government released several satellite images, which were disproved, only to say the next day that the images were released accidentally. And then within 24 hours, the Chinese cited a "seismic event" which also was disproved. Had they done something similar a third time, I would have accused the Chinese government of obstruction. It's also interesting how quickly the United States government put forth the theory that the flight was hijacked for use in a future operation. I think there's key information not being divulged here; the Malaysians are too disorganized and have been overtaken by events, the Chinese appear relatively incompetent but in an almost deliberate fashion, and the United States has been precise in its theories but vague in its reasons.

One thing that has not been brought up in the media, as far as I can tell, is the cargo manifest, though someone mentioned it here previously. Was there anything in the cargo or on one of the passengers deemed important or dangerous? According to the book Gideon's Spies, the Israelis interdicted a passenger on a Russia to Germany flight for carrying plutonium on his person with the intention to sell it. Proliferation is a major issue that rarely makes the news - what was the outcome of the 2007 South Africa nuclear plant incident? This is just speculation (and to be clear, there's no relation between that event and this one) but I think there is certainly more to this incident than currently being acknowledged.

I think the plane could have been deliberately diverted, interdicted, or otherwise detained or downed by a government or someone acting a government's behalf.

[Dayuhan]

Accessing the E&E bay wouldn't have tripped any alarms AFAIK. Disabling the transponder and ACARS VHF systems would open up a few possibilities for the crew to discover and become concerned about. There would be a warning message to notify the crew that the TCAS system which is integrated with the transponder, and this warning would be displayed on the screens in front of the pilots. It could be missed. Maybe. For 20 minutes or more, I don't know. If everything else was normal and this was the only issue to deal with, they'd take action in seconds. If there were other problems to be dealt with, once out of the airway it might become the last item on a long list of other problems to overcome.

Does that mean that anyone with the right knowledge and the right screwdriver can access the E&E bay without triggering any kind of alarm? That seems a bit of an oversight on the security side.


All we know of the cargo now is that it is not hazardous. There's speculation that the plane was carrying 50 fewer passengers than it normally would because of the weight of the cargo, and there's speculation that the cargo is gold. But I'd expect at least a moderately large number of armed guards and possibly some diplomatic staff to be on board.

That seems pretty speculative. I've flown around Asia a fair bit, and a flight that's not full generally just means they didn't sell all the tickets. Just on a loose basis... figure 60kg/passenger (predominantly Asian market, relatively small people) plus 20kg luggage/person... displacing 50 passengers gets you roughly 4000 kilos. Lot of gold. Worth a lot of effort to steal, yes, but hard to imagine why anyone would be shipping that around on a commercial airliner.

[Biggus]

Given the direction the investigation is going, I would not be surprised to see less and less information emerging.

Information is being managed, but I am more and more of the belief that it's being managed because the Malaysians don't have much experience in dealing with the media and are holding onto information in order to have something useful to say every day or two. We already know exactly how apparently insane the media becomes when left to their imaginations. I've heard everything from remote control by iphone app to night time formation flying over mainland China. Even Rupert Murdoch has said something like 'it's in NW Pakistan for future use, hidden like Bin Laden was'. Insanity.



One thing that has not been brought up in the media, as far as I can tell, is the cargo manifest, though someone mentioned it here previously. Was there anything in the cargo or on one of the passengers deemed important or dangerous? According to the book Gideon's Spies, the Israelis interdicted a passenger on a Russia to Germany flight for carrying plutonium on his person with the intention to sell it. Proliferation is a major issue that rarely makes the news - what was the outcome of the 2007 South Africa nuclear plant incident? This is just speculation (and to be clear, there's no relation between that event and this one) but I think there is certainly more to this incident than currently being acknowledged.

I think the plane could have been deliberately diverted, interdicted, or otherwise detained or downed by a government or someone acting a government's behalf.

The only information relating to the cargo is that it is non-hazardous in nature.

All we have beyond the currently released facts is speculation.

I am of the belief that the only place to land the aircraft on the northern arc is China, with the knowledge and cooperation of the Chinese government. Possibly a hijacking and seige being kept quiet until resolved.

Of course, I'm also of the belief that the focus on the northern arc was done simply because it'd be resolved faster. The southern arc will take a great deal more time and effort.

[Biggus]

Does that mean that anyone with the right knowledge and the right screwdriver can access the E&E bay without triggering any kind of alarm? That seems a bit of an oversight on the security side.
Maybe. Some airlines have bolted that access point from the inside of the bay. It's also something that would take a bit of time and certainly enough noise to make everyone in the first dozen rows very much aware that something was happening.


That seems pretty speculative. I've flown around Asia a fair bit, and a flight that's not full generally just means they didn't sell all the tickets. Just on a loose basis... figure 60kg/passenger (predominantly Asian market, relatively small people plus 20kg luggage/person... displacing 50 passengers gets you roughly 4000 kilos. Lot of gold. Worth a lot of effort to steal, yes, but hard to imagine why anyone would be shipping that around on a commercial airliner.

The airlines calculate on 77kg average per person, and 23kg baggage, IIRC.

I can't imagine sending what could possibly be several hundred million dollars' worth of gold without significant security, to include a specially chartered flight.

But it's one of the theories that have been put out there. As we've both noted, the signal-to-noise ratio in the information we've been given is at least mildly disturbing.

[carl]

Where the plane could land:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02853/grab_2853492c.jpg

Or link:http://project.wnyc.org/runways/

Does that map include all the old WWII airfields?

[Dayuhan]

I am of the belief that the only place to land the aircraft on the northern arc is China, with the knowledge and cooperation of the Chinese government. Possibly a hijacking and seige being kept quiet until resolved.

Or the Chinese shot it down, subsequently realized that a bunch of their citizens were on board, and decided not to mention it... there are places along the China/Myanmar border for a downed plane to disappear.

That's only slightly less farfetched than the idea that it's hidden in Pakistan.

I'd expect the Chinese to resolve a siege pretty quickly, though not necessarily cleanly.


Of course, I'm also of the belief that the focus on the northern arc was done simply because it'd be resolved faster. The southern arc will take a great deal more time and effort.

That makes more sense. Less entertainment, but more sense.

[Biggus]

Does that map include all the old WWII airfields?

Probably not.

You could probably discount the vast majority of them, a lightly loaded 777 would be significantly heavier than a fully loaded B-17 and require a much longer landing run. Factor in several decades of no upkeep in the tropics, it'd be a miracle to not become a smoking hole in the mud.

Not impossible. About as likely as landing in China, Pakistan, Kazakhstan or Iran, really.

[Dayuhan]

Does that map include all the old WWII airfields?

I don't think they'd be anywhere close to big enough, and very few would still be in usable condition. I've seen lots of those old fields, Philippines is riddled with them (there's an old Japanese strip maybe 3km from where I'm sitting). They are a reminder of how much aircraft have changed.

[carl]

This is in reference to what American Pride brought up, the cargo/freight. They say there was nothing hazardous on board. They say. Also somebody previously suggested that all the govs involved are lying. And if it was a normal terror attack they probably would have crowed about it even if it failed and crashed.

So my cool but far fetched theory is that there was something on-board that should not have been on-board, which is why all the govs are lying (if they are). I dont mean gold or diamomnds, I mean something that should so not have been there. And somebody or somebodies snatched it but they don't want to brag about it yet because they have a further use for it. That would account for all the misinformation, the govs are frantically covering up and the thieves have something else in mind.

I think they should look more closely at what that plane was actually carrying and also look at that crew again.

Or the plane flew into through the Stargate and got ripped into pieces by Scotty's errant transporter beam.

There. That's my wild theory for the day.

[Biggus]

Or the Chinese shot it down, subsequently realized that a bunch of their citizens were on board, and decided not to mention it... there are places along the China/Myanmar border for a downed plane to disappear.

That's only slightly less farfetched than the idea that it's hidden in Pakistan.

I'd expect the Chinese to resolve a siege pretty quickly, though not necessarily cleanly.

Yes, we're heading towards the 'stolen by alien space bats' end of the spectrum with just about any theory that doesn't end with 'It's at the bottom of the ocean in location unknown for reason unknown and won't be found for some time, if at all', just as happened several decades ago with another Malaysian passenger flight.

[Biggus]

This is in reference to what American Pride brought up, the cargo/freight. They say there was nothing hazardous on board. They say. Also somebody previously suggested that all the govs involved are lying. And if it was a normal terror attack they probably would have crowed about it even if it failed and crashed.

So my cool but far fetched theory is that there was something on-board that should not have been on-board, which is why all the govs are lying (if they are). I dont mean gold or diamomnds, I mean something that should so not have been there. And somebody or somebodies snatched it but they don't want to brag about it yet because they have a further use for it. That would account for all the misinformation, the govs are frantically covering up and the thieves have something else in mind.

I think they should look more closely at what that plane was actually carrying and also look at that crew again.

Or the plane flew into through the Stargate and got ripped into pieces by Scotty's errant transporter beam.

There. That's my wild theory for the day.

Or there's something on board as you describe and the aircraft has had a decompression event caused by a maintenance oversight and there's a mad scramble to secure the cargo.

So who ships something that valuable on an airline?

[carl]

I don't think they'd be anywhere close to big enough, and very few would still be in usable condition. I've seen lots of those old fields, Philippines is riddled with them (there's an old Japanese strip maybe 3km from where I'm sitting). They are a reminder of how much aircraft have changed.

If you were only going to land with no intention of taking off again and didn't mind beating up the airplane, the strip may not have to be on such good condition. A fully loaded B-24 would have needed a pretty long strip, far more than a fighter strip. But it has been along time.

Also, here in the states there are a lot of old abandoned fields from the cold war that would be more than adequate. In Congo too. Congo has some huge ones. Are there fields like that in Asia that you know of?

[carl]

So who ships something that valuable on an airline?

Who ships something that valuable that they are going to tell the truth about? Somebody may be lying big time about this.

But as much fun as it is to think of this stuff, you are right, we'll probably never know.

[Dayuhan]

Yes, we're heading towards the 'stolen by alien space bats' end of the spectrum with just about any theory that doesn't end with 'It's at the bottom of the ocean in location unknown for reason unknown and won't be found for some time, if at all', just as happened several decades ago with another Malaysian passenger flight.

Yes, combine that northern arc with 7 hrs flying time and almost any scenario you come up with makes a Bond film look realistic. The ocean is by far the most likely end to the story. I hope they do find it, though they may not. If nothing else, it would be good to have some idea what happened.

[Biggus]

If you were only going to land with no intention of taking off and didn't mind beating up the airplane, the strip may not have to be on such good condition. A fully loaded B-24 would have needed a pretty long strip, far more than a fighter strip. But it has been along time.

Also, here in the states there are a lot of old abandoned fields from the cold war that would be more than adequate. In Congo too. Congo has some huge ones. Are there fields like that in Asia that you know of?

Agreed that a B-24 would need a long runway to get off the ground with full tanks and max payload, but B-24s were designed with rough strips in mind.

You'd be better off looking for a 1.5nm long section of widely divided dual carriageway highway with nothing between the strips of tarmac, no power lines and probably somewhere where nobody would notice the stench of 239 people who have just shat themselves.


Who ships something that valuable that they are going to tell the truth about? Somebody may be lying big time about this.

But as much fun as it is to think of this stuff, you are right, we'll probably never know.

Oh, somebody's been lying alright. That is beyond dispute. The first question is, is the lie malicious in nature, or is it just face-saving?

[slapout9]

The data pings from the aircraft confirm the flying time. Whether it landed or crashed at the end of that time, or whether anyone on board was conscious or even alive for much of that time, remains unknown, but we know how long it was in the air.

I should have been a little clearer. I don't believe it flew for that long and landed on land somewhere. I do believe he (pilot) flew as far as it would go before taking a nosedive into the ocean. Probably Indian Ocean.

[Dayuhan]

Bit of common sense on the pilot's politics:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/03/pilot_zaharie_ahmad_shah_supported_anwar_ibrahim_w as_he_a_terrorist.html

[Biggus]

I should have been a little clearer. I don't believe it flew for that long and landed on land somewhere. I do believe he (pilot) flew as far as it would go before taking a nosedive into the ocean. Probably Indian Ocean.

For all we know, the guy died trying to save 238 people.


Bit of common sense on the pilot's politics:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/03/pilot_zaharie_ahmad_shah_supported_anwar_ibrahim_w as_he_a_terrorist.html

Really good article.

[slapout9]

You seriously think homosexuality is the real issue in the Anwar Ibrahim case?


Stranger things have happened. It is illegal in Malaysia to be gay, It could have embarrassing political ramifications, the pilot was a supposed to be a Good Muslim....I don't know any good Muslim Gays. So the pilot was going to be embarrassed (out of the closet or whatever the girlie men say) and gets desperate and comes up with his "Plan" and then it goes very wrong as amateur/first time criminal plans often do. And when the pilot finally realizes what he has done....as is so often the case he decides to make as big a mess as possible.....so he drives the plane till it runs out of fuel...... to the middle of the big wide Indian ocean and splash....blub, blub, blub sink, sink, sink. A big mess!

[Biggus]

Stranger things have happened. It is illegal in Malaysia to be gay, It could have embarrassing political ramifications, the pilot was a supposed to be a Good Muslim....I don't know any good Muslim Gays. So the pilot was going to be embarrassed (out of the closet or whatever the girlie men say) and gets desperate and comes up with his "Plan" and then it goes very wrong as amateur/first time criminal plans often do. And when the pilot finally realizes what he has done....as is so often the case he decides to make as big a mess as possible.....so he drives the plane till it runs out of fuel...... to the middle of the big wide Indian ocean and splash....blub, blub, blub sink, sink, sink. A big mess!

I don't really have an adequate response, other than to suggest you click Dayuhan's link.

[slapout9]

Bit of common sense on the pilot's politics:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/03/pilot_zaharie_ahmad_shah_supported_anwar_ibrahim_w as_he_a_terrorist.html

Sounds like Bill (blow job) Clinton when he swore he did not have sex with Monica Lewinski.

[slapout9]

I don't really have an adequate response, other than to suggest you click Dayuhan's link.

I did and I responded.

[slapout9]

For all we know, the guy died trying to save 238 people.


Yes, that is a possibility.

[Dayuhan]

Stranger things have happened. It is illegal in Malaysia to be gay, It could have embarrassing political ramifications, the pilot was a supposed to be a Good Muslim....I don't know any good Muslim Gays. So the pilot was going to be embarrassed (out of the closet or whatever the girlie men say) and gets desperate and comes up with his "Plan" and then it goes very wrong as amateur/first time criminal plans often do. And when the pilot finally realizes what he has done....as is so often the case he decides to make as big a mess as possible.....so he drives the plane till it runs out of fuel...... to the middle of the big wide Indian ocean and splash....blub, blub, blub sink, sink, sink. A big mess!

The only connection between him and being gay is that he supports a political party that has a leader who has been accused of being gay, an accusation that many believe to be political harassment. The same party believes (quite reasonably) that Malaysia's laws against homosexuality are medieval and should be reformed. That hardly makes him a closet queen. As I previously noted, Anwar and the PKR have strong support among urban, educated, affluent Malaysians, a group to which a senior MAS pilot surely belongs. Many of his neighbors probably feel the same way, does that make them all gay?

I don't know if he considered himself a "good Muslim" or not. If he was a PKR supporter he was certainly not a fundamentalist Muslim, but different people have different ideas about what being a good Muslim is.

If supporting a party that stands for democracy, political reform, and tolerance makes you gay, maybe the world needs more gay folks. As a basis for speculation it seems very thin and more than a bit rancid.

[Biggus]

Latest update changes things considerably, in my opinion.

Pivotal piece of information #1: ACARS radio link did not fail at 01:07. It transmitted as per expected, and was expected to send the next transmission at 01:37. It was therefore either disabled or it failed at some point in this half hour.

Pivotal piece of information #2: The final voice comms (Malaysian ATC handoff) was spoken by the First Officer.

We're still left with the problem of the transponder going dark a couple of minutes after the handoff, that's very coincidental for an accident. I'd really like to know the time of the garbled contact from another crew to MH370.

Some other strange things apparently came out of the latest press conference. Things like suggesting that the arcs were chosen as likely areas to investigate because they corresponded with airspeed data. That's a load of crap, because we already know that the arcs were selected based upon the latency of the SATCOM ACARS pings and the coverage areas of the relevant (ie, IOR) satellite(s). I suspect someone was asked a question he didn't know the answer to, and made up something on the spot.

Oh, and there was a large quantity of mangosteens. Three to four tonnes.

There's also been reports in the last day about MH370 following a terrain-masking flightplan as low as 5000ft, which if true would substantially shorten the possible flight range (but also probably result in destruction due to overstress).

[Dayuhan]

Oh, and there was a large quantity of mangosteens. Three to four tonnes.

Aliens love those things... or perhaps rations for the 47 day layover in eastern Kazakhstan?

[Biggus]

rations for the 47 day layover in eastern Kazakhstan?

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh3/Biggus_album/1374275731729_zpsefae2551.jpg (http://s252.photobucket.com/user/Biggus_album/media/1374275731729_zpsefae2551.jpg.html)

[AmericanPride]

If we accept the deliberate diversion or take over of the aircraft, I think that in large part precludes the Indian Ocean theory unless we also accept a technical failure or navigation error in conjunction.

(1) If the plane was hi-jacked for future use or extortion, where in the Indian Ocean is a viable landing area?
(2) If the plane was hi-jacked and deliberately crashed, why not immediately instead of ~7 hours later?
(3) Possibly there was a failed hi-jacking attempt, trapping one or both of the crew in the cockpit? But why not return to an airport and why the maneuvers to the Indian Ocean?

Also, as everyone mentioned, the Indian Ocean is big. Really big. If you wanted to make a plane or its passengers or its cargo disappear, crash it into the Indian Ocean. That's just speculation - assassination or sabotage. Since every theory is on the table, it's also possible that the passenger and cargo manifests were forged. Either with fake listings, or missing listings, or added listings. Why was the US quick (day 2 or 3?) to suggest the plane was hi-jacked for a future operation? Was a similar early assessment released after Air France disappeared?

I agree with the statement that the governments are either lying or staying closed-mouthed for the time being. That's partly because there are 10+ countries involved so there's a lot of moving pieces. But that doesn't have much explanatory power for the apparent disorganization of the Malaysian government, the almost-obstructionist involvement of China in the early phase of the search (why the rush to failure?) and America's tight noose around specific information. I think CNN or New York Times cited a "classified analysis" of the plane's potential location a few days ago, which means we're only getting part of the story.

Clandestinely downing a plane has precedence. So does accidentally or deliberately shooting down an aircraft and then later denying it. Why move valuable cargo by plane instead of boat, which is more secure? Perhaps the movers had no access to a boat. Maybe a group involved in proliferation or the movement of some other dangerous cargo. Or perhaps a small quantity on a person or persons or their luggage which would making sea transit impractical? Motive here would focus on Beijing, which is relatively quiet now.

I think technical failure including a fire and rapid or explosive decompression is also a viable theory, but that would be hard to square with the claims of "maneuvers" by the aircraft which suggest control of the plane, but we don't know the details of those maneuvers as far as I know.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I am largely with American Pride. I tried running through the most probable explanations but the event timelines, lack of wreckage, and lack of further communications( except via systems that could not be shut off from the cabin) keep leading me back to human action, probably with the assistance or complicity of one of the crew.

If the pilot wanted to make a political statement why not leave that statement somewhere publicly? It is possible that the very complicated plane had a cascading series of electrical failures that resulted in the death of all aboard before they could call for help, but The actions of the plane after the last communication would indicate intelligent design.

So, barring my most recent "sky net" theory that the plane became self aware and killed everyone on board, I am left with the question of "why this plane?" Cargo makes the most sense. If all you wanted was the cargo all you have to do is get the plane down in one piece. But what are the odds that this crew would get this particular cargo unless this flight was a normal "milk run" for whatever they were after. The second possibility is to use the plane to carry something else, which means you have to get it safely down and then back up. Then the question becomes " why a 777?" A smaller jet would be easier to land and take off again. Your options for landing strips increase. What is the advantage of this type of plane? Cruising range comes to mind. But beyond that ?

[Biggus]

If we accept the deliberate diversion or take over of the aircraft, I think that in large part precludes the Indian Ocean theory unless we also accept a technical failure or navigation error in conjunction.

(1) If the plane was hi-jacked for future use or extortion, where in the Indian Ocean is a viable landing area?
(2) If the plane was hi-jacked and deliberately crashed, why not immediately instead of ~7 hours later?
(3) Possibly there was a failed hi-jacking attempt, trapping one or both of the crew in the cockpit? But why not return to an airport and why the maneuvers to the Indian Ocean?

Also, as everyone mentioned, the Indian Ocean is big. Really big. If you wanted to make a plane or its passengers or its cargo disappear, crash it into the Indian Ocean. That's just speculation - assassination or sabotage. Since every theory is on the table, it's also possible that the passenger and cargo manifests were forged. Either with fake listings, or missing listings, or added listings. Why was the US quick (day 2 or 3?) to suggest the plane was hi-jacked for a future operation? Was a similar early assessment released after Air France disappeared?

I agree with the statement that the governments are either lying or staying closed-mouthed for the time being. That's partly because there are 10+ countries involved so there's a lot of moving pieces. But that doesn't have much explanatory power for the apparent disorganization of the Malaysian government, the almost-obstructionist involvement of China in the early phase of the search (why the rush to failure?) and America's tight noose around specific information. I think CNN or New York Times cited a "classified analysis" of the plane's potential location a few days ago, which means we're only getting part of the story.

Clandestinely downing a plane has precedence. So does accidentally or deliberately shooting down an aircraft and then later denying it. Why move valuable cargo by plane instead of boat, which is more secure? Perhaps the movers had no access to a boat. Maybe a group involved in proliferation or the movement of some other dangerous cargo. Or perhaps a small quantity on a person or persons or their luggage which would making sea transit impractical? Motive here would focus on Beijing, which is relatively quiet now.

I think technical failure including a fire and rapid or explosive decompression is also a viable theory, but that would be hard to square with the claims of "maneuvers" by the aircraft which suggest control of the plane, but we don't know the details of those maneuvers as far as I know.

You make some excellent points. Your third question, about having a pilot trapped in the cockpit doesn't compute, because he alone would have access to the radio circuit breakers. Simpler to suggest that the hijackers killed the pilots early on, had no idea how to use the FMS properly, cracked the sh!ts after a few turns despite killing the pilots, managed to work out how to turn the FMS autopilot off, dialled a heading into the autopilot and hit HDG mode assuming they'd hit landfall again soon.

Something important in relation to the technical failure part of your post: The appearance of human control does not always equal actual, real time human control, at least not in the way that you might normally think about it. Human control could also mean that the aircraft is following the plan in the FMS. That FMS is normally programmed as part of the pre-flight process, but it can be changed on the fly. AFAIK an ACARS message is generated when the plan in the FMS is changed, but it might also do so every time it passes a waypoint too. The important part is that you don't need a person sitting in the cockpit to have a flight appear to be human-controlled.

It would be oh-so-easy to find yourself in an emergency situation where you need to get out of the airway *now* whilst you deal with a critical event, to hit the MCP alt setting, hit a few waypoints in the FMS that aren't that important except to buy you time to deal with the actual problem (including target alt data which you might just bang in numbers that sound about right), and then finally get around to actually addressing the real issue. Only now, hypoxia has overcome you, you haven't selected a low enough alt on the MCP to bring you out of it, and because you didn't detect the hypoxia when it actually started setting in, half of the stuff you've actually punched into the FMS is increasingly error-prone and longterm unhelpful.

[Biggus]

I am largely with American Pride. I tried running through the most probable explanations but the event timelines, lack of wreckage, and lack of further communications( except via systems that could not be shut off from the cabin) keep leading me back to human action, probably with the assistance or complicity of one of the crew.
Except that they could be cut off from the cabin. SATCOM datalink stuff is accessible in the E&E bay. If you've taken the cockpit, it's not hard to go down and sort that out. If you're savvy enough to know how to shut down the VHF and HF ACARS data links in the cockpit, the second thing you do is going to be accessing the E&E. I have a hard time accepting that inconsistency.


What is the advantage of this type of plane? Cruising range comes to mind. But beyond that ?

Range and payload.

A better question might be, why MAS? Ask it from both points of view.

1. Why would you transport something incredibly valuable on what is probably one of the sketchiest national carriers in the reasonably-developed world?

2. Why would you pick an MAS flight to China to hijack?

[AmericanPride]

Why would you transport something incredibly valuable on what is probably one of the sketchiest national carriers in the reasonably-developed world?

I'm not familiar with MAS, but here are some possibilities: the perpetrators (individually or as a group) have assets, relationships, or access to MAS personnel, information, and/or resources. How is security handled in Malaysia? Verification of cargo? What were the previous stops of this particular aircraft and who had access to it during those times?


Why would you pick an MAS flight to China to hijack?

It depends. Perhaps China was their final destination. Perhaps China was a target (but why hi-jack the aircraft so early into the flight?).

Other questions: if it was a political statement to hi-jack the aircraft, the Indian Ocean is the last place to go. Hi-jacked aircraft don't go silent for seven hours and then disappear; whether it's an attack or extortion. If there was a target, why take over the plane in the middle of the flight; why not closer to the target? On 9/11, 3 of the 4 aircraft were overtaken within 30 minutes of take off and near their targets. The take over of the fourth aircraft was delayed but not significantly.

Here's something else to consider: the aircraft was diverted at the furthest point on its route from any country. And it was then directed on the most direct route to the most barren area with the minimal amount of exposure, crossing the Malaysia peninsula at its thinnest point and into the open ocean. That would seem to suggest that the controller of the aircraft did not want to be found.

[TheCurmudgeon]

A better question might be, why MAS? Ask it from both points of view.

1. Why would you transport something incredibly valuable on what is probably one of the sketchiest national carriers in the reasonably-developed world?

2. Why would you pick an MAS flight to China to hijack?

So that would lead one to believe that Cargo was not the target, so we are back to the plane.

As for number 2., I would have to assume that it is because they are such a sketchy company and they had the type of aircraft I wanted in the general locality I needed it to be.

You said something else that made me think. Could this have been perpetrated by ground crew who inserted a series of per-programed commands into the computer?


Something important in relation to the technical failure part of your post: The appearance of human control does not always equal actual, real time human control, at least not in the way that you might normally think about it. Human control could also mean that the aircraft is following the plan in the FMS. That FMS is normally programmed as part of the pre-flight process, but it can be changed on the fly. AFAIK an ACARS message is generated when the plan in the FMS is changed, but it might also do so every time it passes a waypoint too. The important part is that you don't need a person sitting in the cockpit to have a flight appear to be human-controlled.


In certain respects, if I wanted to accomplish this type of pre-programmed action, then the first thing you would want to do was to cut off the transmission of data from the plane that indicated something was amuse in the computer system. If the commands were already there, could they accomplish all of the actions necessary to disable the pilot/copilot and have the plane run a pre-established route on its own?

[AmericanPride]

Another issue: the aircraft produced a series of signals, some of which included airspeed and altitude. I would think plotting this series on a map would strongly indicate the directional intent of the aircraft; Kazakhstan and the southern Indian Ocean are in opposite directions from the last known position of an aircraft travelling West. I have yet to see a media report conducting that basic analysis - and as far as I know, that information has not been released. If the aircraft was lost for an 'innocent' reason or due to terrorism, why would this information not be released immediately? Are there sources and methods concerns involved?

[former_0302]

Another issue: the aircraft produced a series of signals, some of which included airspeed and altitude. I would think plotting this series on a map would strongly indicate the directional intent of the aircraft; Kazakhstan and the southern Indian Ocean are in opposite directions from the last known position of an aircraft travelling West. I have yet to see a media report conducting that basic analysis - and as far as I know, that information has not been released. If the aircraft was lost for an 'innocent' reason or due to terrorism, why would this information not be released immediately? Are there sources and methods concerns involved?

Yeah, this is what gets me. Presumably, they have the arcs for all of the RR satellite pings, and if you overlay them all on the same map, with the plane's last known position, it should be pretty easy to come up with the possible routes to the north or south.

Those pings came every hour, and the last was at 0811, right? So you take the last known position of the plane, at 0215 (when it supposedly was lost on radar), then look at the arc from 0311 and determine the points on that arc where it is possible the plane could have been given its last position. Do the same for all the arcs up to 0811 and you should have a very good idea of where the plane is. There would be two possibilities (north or south), but that information should help to determine that as well. If the pings indicate a straight line at constant speed, it probably went south. If they indicate a broken course, it probably went north.

At least, that's my armchair theory...

[Biggus]

I'm not familiar with MAS, but here are some possibilities: the perpetrators (individually or as a group) have assets, relationships, or access to MAS personnel, information, and/or resources. How is security handled in Malaysia? Verification of cargo? What were the previous stops of this particular aircraft and who had access to it during those times?

Good points to raise. These are all unknowns at this point. I'm sure it'd be possible to track the movements of the aircraft prior to this flight, but we'd probably be talking about an enormous number of people with access to it.


It depends. Perhaps China was their final destination. Perhaps China was a target (but why hi-jack the aircraft so early into the flight?).

Which is the question that ultimately gave me reason to disregard the Uighar gentleman onboard. Given the availability of good handheld GPS, let alone a $25 USB radio receiver and a bit of knowledge about ADS-B, going for active control before making past the first line of defences on mainland China makes little sense.


Other questions: if it was a political statement to hi-jack the aircraft, the Indian Ocean is the last place to go. Hi-jacked aircraft don't go silent for seven hours and then disappear; whether it's an attack or extortion. If there was a target, why take over the plane in the middle of the flight; why not closer to the target? On 9/11, 3 of the 4 aircraft were overtaken within 30 minutes of take off and near their targets. The take over of the fourth aircraft was delayed but not significantly.
This assumes a successful takeover. It's a reasonable assumption to make. Assuming the cabin population are still alive, I'd expect at least one text message to be sent out from a captive, even if the message was composed without coverage. Normally it'd just sit in the outbox until it picks up a tower, and the route surely would have come close to a tower somewhere.



Here's something else to consider: the aircraft was diverted at the furthest point on its route from any country. And it was then directed on the most direct route to the most barren area with the minimal amount of exposure, crossing the Malaysia peninsula at its thinnest point and into the open ocean. That would seem to suggest that the controller of the aircraft did not want to be found.

We don't yet know enough about it's actual route, though. We have a few strong possibilities for where it ended up, but there's no real data as yet to make the call.

[Biggus]

You said something else that made me think. Could this have been perpetrated by ground crew who inserted a series of per-programed commands into the computer?
It's pretty remote in likelihood and not particularly secure from the crew knowing about it. A flight plan could be created and saved, made inactive and later made active by someone sitting in the cockpit during the flight. If I were doing the preflight checklist and noticed that someone had saved a plan to a strange destination that MAS didn't fly to, I'd be inclined to ask a few questions. It probably depends on the Captain though. He might think nothing of it, because he'd be the one that would be normally responsible for activating a flightplan on the FMS.


In certain respects, if I wanted to accomplish this type of pre-programmed action, then the first thing you would want to do was to cut off the transmission of data from the plane that indicated something was amuse in the computer system. If the commands were already there, could they accomplish all of the actions necessary to disable the pilot/copilot and have the plane run a pre-established route on its own?

Essentially, yes. If you have the knowledge to process a new plan in the FMS and you have the ability to get into the cockpit and know which circuit breakers to pull to kill the radios, yes. But if you've got this knowledge, why not kill the SATCOM datalink? It doesn't really compute.

[AmericanPride]

Here's another question, inspired by Biggus' comments: what explains the lack of communication from the passengers? From the last communication at the point of diversion, the aircraft proceeded West over the Malaysian Peninsula. I'm assuming that had messages or phone calls been sent, that would have been the window - if there was a takeover of the aircraft or mechanical problems of any kind noticeable by the passengers, I think it's a reasonable assumption that a message of any kind may have escaped before the aircraft reached the Indian Ocean. Again, citing 9/11, many passengers and crew made phone calls to family, friends, and even the airline company from the cabin within minutes of the hi-jacking. MH370 had seven hours from its last communication.

So, (1) either the passengers were not aware of the diversion, (2) or the passengers did not have access to their communication devices (was there wifi or airphones available on the flight?). If (2), then actions from the hi-jackers would suggest either the communication devices were collected or the passengers were sufficiently intimidated or monitored. That, in turn, would suggest a fairly sized team of perpetrators; at least one to fly the plane and several more to monitor and control the passengers. Even with 4 hi-jackers on a flight during 9/11, many passengers/crew still managed to make phone calls within minutes of the event.

[Biggus]

Another issue: the aircraft produced a series of signals, some of which included airspeed and altitude. I would think plotting this series on a map would strongly indicate the directional intent of the aircraft; Kazakhstan and the southern Indian Ocean are in opposite directions from the last known position of an aircraft travelling West. I have yet to see a media report conducting that basic analysis - and as far as I know, that information has not been released. If the aircraft was lost for an 'innocent' reason or due to terrorism, why would this information not be released immediately? Are there sources and methods concerns involved?

As far as I know, the data produced by ACARS after the radio datalinks went down contains no such information. Just a series of pings, effectively checking that the connection still existed.

I think by now anyone reading this thread knows that I am not entirely sold on the hijacking explanation. I'm going to posit my one and only hijacking motivational theory for the day. I'm not enough of an Asia-Pacific expert to judge the reasonableness of the theory: It's a probe.

For terrorists, get some cannonfodder with a little training, possibly a comms system independent of the aircraft, do a dry run and disappear the evidence. Watch as more and more not-really-openly-talked-about stuff becomes public knowledge, learn about the likely responses, wait a year or two and press on with the real mission.

For an operation by a country, send an airliner over a huge chunk of the neighbourhood, watch how everyone reacts, see if you can pick anything up about their capabilities that you don't currently know.

I'd go with the terrorist angle, having independent comms systems onboard would probably explain a bit about why the US was so quick to start suggesting things were amiss, especially in the light of the fact that the ACARS datalink didn't get disabled until after last voice contact.

[Biggus]

Here's another question, inspired by Biggus' comments: what explains the lack of communication from the passengers? From the last communication at the point of diversion, the aircraft proceeded West over the Malaysian Peninsula. I'm assuming that had messages or phone calls been sent, that would have been the window - if there was a takeover of the aircraft or mechanical problems of any kind noticeable by the passengers, I think it's a reasonable assumption that a message of any kind may have escaped before the aircraft reached the Indian Ocean. Again, citing 9/11, many passengers and crew made phone calls to family, friends, and even the airline company from the cabin within minutes of the hi-jacking. MH370 had seven hours from its last communication.

So, (1) either the passengers were not aware of the diversion, (2) or the passengers did not have access to their communication devices (was there wifi or airphones available on the flight?). If (2), then actions from the hi-jackers would suggest either the communication devices were collected or the passengers were sufficiently intimidated or monitored. That, in turn, would suggest a fairly sized team of perpetrators; at least one to fly the plane and several more to monitor and control the passengers. Even with 4 hi-jackers on a flight during 9/11, many passengers/crew still managed to make phone calls within minutes of the event.

Well, it was a red-eye flight over a great deal of terrain that lacked mobile phone towers. In-cabin SATCOM was unavailable, and even if it was available, both it and onboard wifi (which would probably be unavailable anyway) is something that can be disabled in the cockpit in such a way as to not arouse real suspicions. It's probably also not terribly hard to do a 'this is your Captain speaking, we've encounted a delay at Beijing and we'll be up here for a couple more hours' type of message and not have too many questions asked.

Also worth mentioning that in parts of Southeast Asia, it's not hard to acquire a mobile phone blocker.

But yes, there are times when voice contact by phone is possible from an airliner. It's not perfect, it's very hit-and-miss, and text contact would be far far easier to do with any reliability whilst conveying any meaning.

[AmericanPride]

Well, it was a red-eye flight over a great deal of terrain that lacked mobile phone towers. In-cabin SATCOM was unavailable, and even if it was available, both it and onboard wifi (which would probably be unavailable anyway) is something that can be disabled in the cockpit in such a way as to not arouse real suspicions. It's probably also not terribly hard to do a 'this is your Captain speaking, we've encounted a delay at Beijing and we'll be up here for a couple more hours' type of message and not have too many questions asked.

Also worth mentioning that in parts of Southeast Asia, it's not hard to acquire a mobile phone blocker.

But yes, there are times when voice contact by phone is possible from an airliner. It's not perfect, it's very hit-and-miss, and text contact would be far far easier to do with any reliability whilst conveying any meaning.

That would suggest then that the take over the aircraft was (relatively) non-violent and uneventful. So we're back to the crew - people who have access to the cockpit.

[Biggus]

That would suggest then that the take over the aircraft was (relatively) non-violent and uneventful. So we're back to the crew - people who have access to the cockpit.

Not necessarily. I'm pointing out the possibility that it could happen. Twelve crew working on the flight, plus an MAS engineer, as I understand.

It doesn't discount the violent takeover in any way, merely an alternative where you get a bunch of compliant hostages for several hours. If there's no other chance to take the cockpit than violent action at the right moment, then that's what it takes. Mobile phone jammer set to 'active', roll on the opening door as a pilot steps out to go to the toilet. If you're quick, lucky and know where to find the crash-axe, you could be in there, armed and fairly bloody in seconds. It's just a lot easier if a crew member or MAS employee did it and concealed it for the remainder of the flight.

Edit: Still not squaring with the still functioning ACARS satellite uplink though.

[AmericanPride]

So, if this was a deliberate act (and successfully executed), who gains under each proposed scenario?

[TheCurmudgeon]

I think by now anyone reading this thread knows that I am not entirely sold on the hijacking explanation. I'm going to posit my one and only hijacking motivational theory for the day. I'm not enough of an Asia-Pacific expert to judge the reasonableness of the theory: It's a probe.

For terrorists, get some cannonfodder with a little training, possibly a comms system independent of the aircraft, do a dry run and disappear the evidence. Watch as more and more not-really-openly-talked-about stuff becomes public knowledge, learn about the likely responses, wait a year or two and press on with the real mission.

For an operation by a country, send an airliner over a huge chunk of the neighbourhood, watch how everyone reacts, see if you can pick anything up about their capabilities that you don't currently know.

I'd go with the terrorist angle, having independent comms systems onboard would probably explain a bit about why the US was so quick to start suggesting things were amiss, especially in the light of the fact that the ACARS datalink didn't get disabled until after last voice contact.

I thought about the "dry run" scenario, or more likely, a dry run that went wrong.

I know you are apt to defend the pilot/copilot, but they are the two who would be in a position to understand the aircraft and know when/where to take control. It could have been a passenger who was familiar to the pilot or copilot or it could have been someone who had psychological control over either of them. In any case, having either the pilot or copilot in on the scheme (or an unwilling dup) reduces the complication of the plot.

If not the pilot copilot then a crew member or a ground crew member who had set things up for someone else to execute once in the air, but you have to get access to the cockpit without the pilot/copilot sending a coded message that they were in trouble. But every time you add people you add the possibility of being found out or things going wrong. The fewer, the better.

The most likely scenario from there is that the cabin was depressurized, the plane flew to where the air is thin, and everyone without oxygen died. Not sure that is even possible, but it eliminates any issues with the passengers. I suppose the ground crew could have even disabled the oxygen mask system, but I am not sure that is possible.

Any of these scenarios limits the number of people willing to do this. Not many common thieves or even governments are willing to kill over 200 people. Yes, I am assuming that they are dead, and that killing them was part of the plan. This is a dangerous and risky operation for any government or crime syndicate when you probably could accomplish the same thing on the ground (as in the Brussels Diamond heist).

It smacks of someone who knew quite a bit, but not everything. A mechanic might have understood the nature of the Sat comm and disabled it early on. Of course, they might have just forgot or missed the opportunity. Terrorist error, so to speak.

And yes, I am speculating, but, unless 1) it was a terrorist group who wanted the plane to fly into something (say, in India) and things went wrong over the ocean, or 2) it was a terrorist group who wanted the plane itself for a future mission, I am almost ready to go with mango eating space aliens.

[TheCurmudgeon]

One other thing, if it was a terrorist group and things went wrong, then why not take credit for the kill?

You keep quite if you are not done yet.

It could be a dry run, but if there were terrorists on the plane it was a dry run where they died in the end (assuming the plane did not land somewhere) then I would have to question what type of terrorist would go in for that?

I have to be careful, because I am the first to argue that trying to impute logical motives to terrorists activities is probably not your best option. You have to think like them. But even they would not be willing to kill off a fellow terrorist unless there was gain in it somewhere.

Time traveling, mango eating space aliens - got to be the answer.

[AmericanPride]

Well... as far as a dry run... wouldn't it be important for the plane to at least be found so that assessments could be made about how difficult it was to penetrate security, seize the aircraft, etc? If this was a dry run, the perpetrators would only know the external search and rescue response.

[slapout9]

I have to be careful, because I am the first to argue that trying to impute logical motives to terrorists activities is probably not your best option. You have to think like them.

Finally somebody gets it. You are absolutely correct!!!!! trying to use logic when dealing with criminals,terrorist,etc. is total foolishness. To try and use logic and reason on a criminal is just totally "rancid":D

[carl]

Calling JMM 99.

Mike, this is an idle question but I'm curious. Can the flight crew hi-jack their own airplane? They are the final authority on what the plane does and where it goes while it is in the air and can always argue flight safety. They can be charged with stealing the airplane and kidnapping I suppose once they land but can they be charged with hi-jacking?

[TheCurmudgeon]

More information: http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/a-map-of-where-mh370-might-have-disappeared-to-with-added-satellite-data/


Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared from civilian radar at 1:21 a.m. on March 8 over the Gulf of Thailand. Just two minutes before that, the co-pilot, Fariq Abdul Hamid, had said a routine goodnight over the radio to the control tower in Kuala Lumpur, where the plane had taken off 40 minutes earlier. If there was anything amiss, Fariq’s voice didn’t betray it. Was he hiding malicious intentions well? If he was innocent, was someone else in the cockpit at that very moment, forcing him at the point of a weapon of some kind to feign calm? Or did someone take control of the plane immediately after that last goodnight and shut off the plane’s transponder in a carefully planned hijacking, just as the plane was exiting Malaysian airspace?

The problem is that none of these theories are especially plausible. So far, Malaysian authorities have searched Fariq’s home and that of the captain, Zaharie Ahmad Shah. Their personal histories don’t suggest they were dangerous people, though that investigation is not yet concluded. On the other hand, if there were sophisticated hijackers aboard the plane who knew exactly when the plane would be flying out of range of Malaysian civilian radar, then what were their goals? Why hasn’t anyone heard from the plane in more than a week?

What are the odds that the Malaysian radar tracking is wrong and we are all chasing ghosts?

[slapout9]

What are the odds that the Malaysian radar tracking is wrong and we are all chasing ghosts?

Wouldn't surprise me at all. This whole thing is about chasing ghosts, nobody seems to know anything for sure. That is why we should stick with the backrounds of all the people involved, the hardware answers just don't seem to be working out.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Wouldn't surprise me at all. This whole thing is about chasing ghosts, nobody seems to know anything for sure. That is why we should stick with the backrounds of all the people involved, the hardware answers just don't seem to be working out.

I would agree with you. I will admit I am, perhaps unnecessarily, interested in this incident. I wish I knew more about the key players, but I also realize that I am just a spectator.

I keep coming back to what I term my "worst case scenario" - that the plane was stolen (and all aboard who were not in on the plan, killed) in order to use it to fly something big and nasty into the US. The saving grace seems to be that, from what I can tell, even if fully refueled, it could not make it to the US from, lets say, Pakistan. (Sorry to everyone in London, I am pretty sure it could reach you.)

Again, it is probably just the Irish Whiskey speaking, but I do have a small concern that this plane could be used to devastating effect as part of a larger plan.

[TheCurmudgeon]

More news (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/malaysia-u-turns-on-satellite-data-evidence-unsure-when-system-went-off-line/2014/03/17/e93be726-add5-11e3-96dc-d6ea14c099f9_story.html) that makes things less clear.


Malaysian authorities, in the latest of a series of U-turns, reversed themselves Monday on a key detail of what happened in the cockpit of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in the minutes before it vanished from civilian radar nine days ago.

The government had previously said that a key satellite communications system had been disabled some time before the cockpit made final radio contact with air traffic control — and before the plane disappeared from civilian radar contact with 239 passengers and crew on board.

That sequence of events suggested that something suspicious was already underway before that final radio call was made, and that one or both pilots were either involved in a plot to commandeer the Boeing 777 or acting under duress.

But authorities acknowledged Monday that they do not know exactly when that data system went dark, making it harder to pinpoint when the suspected act of hijacking or sabotage was initiated.

The new disclosure does not change the criminal nature of the probe into the missing airliner — an investigation that now has countries from Australia to Kazakhstan scouring radar and satellite data for signs of the plane, and deploying sea and air search teams to hunt for evidence of the aircraft. It still appears likely that somebody was trying to cover their tracks as the plane was deliberately flown off-course.

[Dayuhan]

Wouldn't surprise me at all. This whole thing is about chasing ghosts, nobody seems to know anything for sure. That is why we should stick with the backrounds of all the people involved, the hardware answers just don't seem to be working out.

True enough, though if anything really interesting or suspect has been found out about any of the people, it has yet to be revealed... which is of course not surprising.


I keep coming back to what I term my "worst case scenario" - that the plane was stolen (and all aboard who were not in on the plan, killed) in order to use it to fly something big and nasty into the US. The saving grace seems to be that, from what I can tell, even if fully refueled, it could not make it to the US from, lets say, Pakistan. (Sorry to everyone in London, I am pretty sure it could reach you.)

I just can't see how you'd get it to Pakistan, or any similar place. To fly it to Pakistan you'd have to cross India and/or China, and how do you do that without triggering some kind of alert? Given the combination of having to fly through heavily watched airspace, finding a place to land, refuel, and take off again undetected... it just doesn't come off as very probable, at least not without active complicity from one or more governments..

If I had to guess, I'd guess somebody had a plan, and it failed catastrophically, leading to the plane cruising off over and eventually into the ocean. It would not be a guess with a very high confidence level, but at this point none of them have a very high confidence level.

[TheCurmudgeon]

True enough, though if anything really interesting or suspect has been found out about any of the people, it has yet to be revealed... which is of course not surprising.


I just can't see how you'd get it to Pakistan, or any similar place. To fly it to Pakistan you'd have to cross India and/or China, and how do you do that without triggering some kind of alert? Given the combination of having to fly through heavily watched airspace, finding a place to land, refuel, and take off again undetected... it just doesn't come off as very probable, at least not without active complicity from one or more governments..

You would have to trace the route of a normal commercial airline. For all intents and purposes it would look like a normal commercial airline. Flown close enough to a plane already on that route, it could look like an echo.

Yes, there would be complicity from Pakistan (or elements in the Pakistani security services who are pissed about the murder of bin Laden), but I am not sure that is really a stretch.

[anotherguy]

Re: possibility of the pilot being homosexual. Somewhere earlier today I read that his wife and children moved out of their home the day before the flight disappeared, but as with everything surrounding this, hard facts seem tough to come by.

ETA: Wife and kids moving out mentioned here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582595/Boeing-777-hijackers-plunged-5-000ft-used-low-altitude-terrain-masking-manoeuvre-practised-fighter-jets-avoid-radar-detection.html

Maybe he came out, they moved out and instead of going to prison he ended it in protest? Although, it's curious that it has been disclosed that they had moved out, but no explanation is given. Why the secrecy?

I have been catching up on this discussion in bits and pieces so forgive me if it has already been mentioned, but has anyone mentioned possibility of testing an exploit of whatever the exact vulnerability mentioned here is:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/11/18/2013-27343/special-conditions-boeing-model-777-200--300-and--300er-series-airplanes-aircraft-electronic-system

[wm]

Is air freight the best way to ship such a quantity of mangosteens? This seems rather odd. Smells more like smuggling than terror to me

Why should one take the last Malaysian military report so seriously? the heading could easily be exactly 180 degrees wrong, if it even was the right aircraft.

Simple answer for the lack of passenger contacts--they and the cabin crew all were killed--either gassed or died of anoxia when cabin was depressurized and no O2 flowed from masks.

My guess is that the first officer (maybe the captain was also involved) got paid off to deliver something somewhere that was loaded as mangosteens--gold or drugs, for example. Perhaps Malaysian radar post was also paid off. Once delivery was made the airplane was no longer needed.

I seem to remember that the western Sahara has been the site of many "lost" aircraft landings from drug smugglers flying over from South America.

[jmm99]

Answer in first paragraph of Airplane Hijacking - Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_hijacking):


Aircraft hijacking (also known as aircraft piracy, especially within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and informally as skyjacking) is the unlawful seizure of an aircraft by an individual or a group. In most cases, the pilot is forced to fly according to the orders of the hijackers. Occasionally, however, the hijackers have flown the aircraft themselves, such as the September 11 attacks of 2001. In at least three cases, the plane was hijacked by the official pilot or co-pilot.[1][2][3][4]

1. China Airlines Flight 334 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_334)

2. "Air China pilot hijacks his own jet to Taiwan (http://web.archive.org/web/20080321171516/http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9810/28/hijack.china.taiwan.02/index.html)". CNN. 1998-10-28. Archived from the original on 2008-03-21. Retrieved 2007-01-25.

3. B. Raman (2000-01-02). "PLANE HIJACKING: IN PERSPECTIVE (http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/paper103)". South Asia Analysis Group. Retrieved 2007-01-25.

4. Ethiopian Airlines ET702 hijacking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_ET702_hijacking)

Legalisms are in footnote 3.

Regards

Mike

[Dayuhan]

You would have to trace the route of a normal commercial airline. For all intents and purposes it would look like a normal commercial airline. Flown close enough to a plane already on that route, it could look like an echo.

I don't think it would be that simple. A radar contact without transponder data or contact with air traffic controllers is an anomaly and would trigger a response almost anywhere, even on a standard route: people do remember 9/11. Biggus would know more about it than I, but I don't think you could fly close enough to another plane to look like an echo without triggering some serious alarm and complaint from the pilots of the plane you were shadowing.


Yes, there would be complicity from Pakistan (or elements in the Pakistani security services who are pissed about the murder of bin Laden), but I am not sure that is really a stretch.

You'd still have to get it across India or China, and hide it. It's not the easiest thing to hide.


Re: possibility of the pilot being homosexual. Somewhere earlier today I read that his wife and children moved out of their home the day before the flight disappeared, but as with everything surrounding this, hard facts seem tough to come by.

ETA: Wife and kids moving out mentioned here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582595/Boeing-777-hijackers-plunged-5-000ft-used-low-altitude-terrain-masking-manoeuvre-practised-fighter-jets-avoid-radar-detection.html

Maybe he came out, they moved out and instead of going to prison he ended it in protest?

London tabloids are notoriously unreliable sources.

The only reason anyone has suggested for believing that the pilot is gay was that someone somewhere extrapolated support for Anwar Ibrahim into "support for homosexuality", which of course we all know means you must be gay. If support for the PKR makes someone gay, there's a whole lot of gay people in KL.

Of course it's not impossible (few things are at this point), but there's also been no even marginally credible basis proposed for the theory.


Is air freight the best way to ship such a quantity of mangosteens? This seems rather odd. Smells more like smuggling than terror to me

It's the only way; they are perishable. This is very very common, there's high demand for tropical fruit in NE Asia, and flights from SE Asia to Japan, Korea, and northern China routinely carry large shipments of fruit.


My guess is that the first officer (maybe the captain was also involved) got paid off to deliver something somewhere that was loaded as mangosteens--gold or drugs, for example. Perhaps Malaysian radar post was also paid off. Once delivery was made the airplane was no longer needed.

Seems a very complicated way to smuggle something, and very risky as well.

[anotherguy]

London tabloids are notoriously unreliable sources.


Absolutely. That's not where I originally saw it. just can't find the original link and don't recall the source.

[Dayuhan]

A bit more on the pilot... doesn't exactly come off looking like a criminal mastermind or a nut case.

http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Flight-370-Pilot-Backed-Opposition-Showed-5323558.php#page-1

http://qz.com/188723/seven-things-we-know-about-malaysian-pilot-zaharie-shah-from-his-internet-footprint/

http://www.news.com.au/world/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370s-captain-zaharie-ahmad-shah-has-daughter-aishah-zaharie-who-was-in-australia/story-fndir2ev-1226857201698

The tabloids are making a big deal of the fact that the pilots are being investigated, which seems natural and inevitable under the circumstances. If anything incriminating or suspicious has come up, it has not been released.

From WSJ:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304017604579443232753452924?mg=ren o64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB1000 1424052702304017604579443232753452924.html


Capt. Zaharie's family left their home in a gated community--located about an hour's drive from Kuala Lumpur--on March 8 after news came in that Flight 370 had gone missing, according to one of the estate's security guards. However, asked at Sunday's news briefing if Capt. Zaharie's family had moved out of their home, Malaysian police chief Khalid Abu Bakar said that wasn't the case.

Mr. Fariq's family meanwhile has remained at home in another suburb, roughly 10 minutes' drive from Capt. Zaharie's home, but have shunned media attention, according to a neighbor.

"Left the home" can easily just mean they went to a relative's house, or any number of other things. it doesn't mean they moved out. Jumping from there to the supposition that the pilot was gay, based on noo evidence beyond his support for the PKR, seems pretty far off the page. Of course personal stress and the completely unpredictable action can never be discounted... but again, if there's anything even vaguely suspicious in the picture, it has not been made public.

[slapout9]

Re: possibility of the pilot being homosexual. Somewhere earlier today I read that his wife and children moved out of their home the day before the flight disappeared, but as with everything surrounding this, hard facts seem tough to come by.

ETA: Wife and kids moving out mentioned here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582595/Boeing-777-hijackers-plunged-5-000ft-used-low-altitude-terrain-masking-manoeuvre-practised-fighter-jets-avoid-radar-detection.html

Maybe he came out, they moved out and instead of going to prison he ended it in protest? Although, it's curious that it has been disclosed that they had moved out, but no explanation is given. Why the secrecy?

I have been catching up on this discussion in bits and pieces so forgive me if it has already been mentioned, but has anyone mentioned possibility of testing an exploit of whatever the exact vulnerability mentioned here is:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/11/18/2013-27343/special-conditions-boeing-model-777-200--300-and--300er-series-airplanes-aircraft-electronic-system

I brought that up based upon some reports coming from other sources. I believed then and still do this was a Pilot suicide. He was either extremely embarrassed or possibly being blackmailed based upon some deep personal secret he has (homosexuality,etc.).

anotherguy Also don't feel bad about joining the thread late, more points of view are always good for discussion, which is what the council is all about. So keep contributing.

[Biggus]

Well... as far as a dry run... wouldn't it be important for the plane to at least be found so that assessments could be made about how difficult it was to penetrate security, seize the aircraft, etc? If this was a dry run, the perpetrators would only know the external search and rescue response.

Unless they had independent comms equipment. Then they'd have feedback, the adequacy of which I can't really say - I haven't thought too hard about it.


Finally somebody gets it. You are absolutely correct!!!!! trying to use logic when dealing with criminals,terrorist,etc. is total foolishness. To try and use logic and reason on a criminal is just totally "rancid":D
I disagree that logic an reason aren't relevant, particularly if someone is calculatedly stealing an aircraft and disappearing. It doesn't account for every single possibility, but it's a good place to start.


Wouldn't surprise me at all. This whole thing is about chasing ghosts, nobody seems to know anything for sure. That is why we should stick with the backrounds of all the people involved, the hardware answers just don't seem to be working out.

You sure about that? The hardware answers are incredibly compelling. We now know that the ACARS radio links were not disabled before last voice contact. We've got a radar track that shows the aircraft turning off to the best possible shot at a safe landing at Langkawi and a bunch of stuff that looks like shutting down systems in the cockpit to eliminate a fire, which they may have managed to do, but not before succumbing to asphyxia or hypoxia.

The hardware answers look far less like terrorism.


More news (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/malaysia-u-turns-on-satellite-data-evidence-unsure-when-system-went-off-line/2014/03/17/e93be726-add5-11e3-96dc-d6ea14c099f9_story.html) that makes things less clear.
This is what I was saying yesterday. ACARS radio links weren't disabled prior to last voice contact.


I don't think it would be that simple. A radar contact without transponder data or contact with air traffic controllers is an anomaly and would trigger a response almost anywhere, even on a standard route: people do remember 9/11. Biggus would know more about it than I, but I don't think you could fly close enough to another plane to look like an echo without triggering some serious alarm and complaint from the pilots of the plane you were shadowing.


Wouldn't happen. The transponder not only squawks a pre-designated code for the flight based upon the ATC's instruction, but it also has it's own embedded identification that can't be changed. If there's an aircraft on my primary radar without a transponder, I'm going to make contact one way or another. Normally, you'd expect voice and then either compliance or a declared emergency. If declared emergency, I'd be getting the ACARS data.

If we're talking about flying in close formation to hide your blip inside someone else's blip, that's marginally more likely than being abducted by aliens. It's physically possible to formate on another airliner-type airframe (ever seen a KC-135 refuelling an E-3?), but to hold it there for hours would be difficult, and primary radar would show an even bigger return. To use a crude analogy, the return that the radar operators would see wouldn't be like the normal Rosie O'Donnell sized blip, it'd look like Rosie O'Donnell carrying another Rosie O'Donnell on her shoulders. If I were Malaysia or Thailand, I might not be scrambling my interceptors, but if I were Vietnam, China, India and possibly even Pakistan, I'd be doing something about it.

[anotherguy]

Anyone know where the Sabalan and Kharg are currently in their trip to the US east coast?

[Biggus]

Anyone know where the Sabalan and Kharg are currently in their trip to the US east coast?

There's this (http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130322/DEFREG03/303220020/Australia-Confirms-Iranian-Warship-Interception) report.

“An Australian AP-3C Orion encountered an Iranian frigate during a routine Operation Gateway patrol on 10 March 2013,” said a Defence Department spokesperson.

The Iranian Navy ships were reportedly heading home after a port visit to Zhangjiagang in China and were nearing Sri Lanka when they were intercepted by the Australian aircraft.

[anotherguy]

NYT is reporting that first turn that diverted the plane was made via entry into the computer system and not manually.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp&gwh=1E3323728BD201E4D1AA92BEA3AA1F11&gwt=pay

[Biggus]

NYT is reporting that first turn that diverted the plane was made via entry into the computer system and not manually.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp&gwh=1E3323728BD201E4D1AA92BEA3AA1F11&gwt=pay

Still neither here nor there in terms of hijacking vs mechanical issue. Simply punching in the change for the nearest airfields and beginning a movement towards them would look like that.

[anotherguy]

There's this (http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130322/DEFREG03/303220020/Australia-Confirms-Iranian-Warship-Interception) report.

That's from 2013. This is what I am referring too:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/02/18/iranian-ships-in-the-atlantic-are-no-cause-for-concern

I think the plane is underwater, but the potential of the world seeing it airborne again as a weapon exists until disproven.

Definitely reaching, but these ships were laughed off by everyone when their mission was announced. Their public statement that "the mission has a message" is laughable unless the message is to get a tetanus booster. Why send two easily-sunk ships including your largest supply ship to our coast?

As I said, definitely reaching, but I was looking at available information about passengers on board and got to thinking about the two Iranians with stolen passports and what other moves Iran has been making in the world.

[Biggus]

That's from 2013.

Good pickup. It's a very interesting question.

[Dayuhan]

I brought that up based upon some reports coming from other sources. I believed then and still do this was a Pilot suicide. He was either extremely embarrassed or possibly being blackmailed based upon some deep personal secret he has (homosexuality,etc.).

Of course that's not impossible (not much is, at this point) but there seems to be no publicly available evidence at all to suggest such a problem. The allegation that his family moved out seems to go back to a subdivision security guard saying that they'd left the house and a tabloid reporter spinning a story out of it. There's no reason at all to suppose he's gay... so it really doesn't get us anywhere beyond idle speculation.

[Dayuhan]

http://my.news.yahoo.com/police-probe-finds-no-red-flags-mh370-pilots-013714248.html


Police probe finds no red flags on MH370 pilots, says report

Police investigations into the pilot and co-pilot of missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 have not turned up any red flags in their backgrounds, The Wall Street Journal reported today.

A source close to the investigations told the business daily that information on the two men – 53-year-old Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah and Fariq Abdul Hamid, 27 – were shared with its counterparts in other countries.

But so far, no suspicious activities or associations had turned up, reported The Wall Street Journal.

A few media outlets are pointing out that the pilot's flight simulator was able to simulate landings in the Maldives, Diego Garcia, and southern India. Some are trying to spin that into a big deal. Others are honest enough to point out that the same software contains thousands of runways all over the world in practically every region.

[anotherguy]

Good pickup. It's a very interesting question.

While I haven't done it yet, I would bet that the plot of the known 2013 route of both ships would be interesting when added to the map of the known flight information. Right around a year before MH370 went missing, those two ships were the first ship Iranian naval ships to traverse the Straight of Malacca since 1979.

If I was writing this as a novel, I would be using the Iranian's claim that they identified 370 surface and subsurface vessels on the 2013 mission as a plot piece, but in reality I would guess it means that they saw some boats that they were able to identify as such.

Possibly coincidentally, a Russian SIGINT ship has been in port in both Venezuela and Cuba this month. Presumably to monitor our reactions to the Iranian vessels.

[Biggus]

http://my.news.yahoo.com/police-probe-finds-no-red-flags-mh370-pilots-013714248.html



A few media outlets are pointing out that the pilot's flight simulator was able to simulate landings in the Maldives, Diego Garcia, and southern India. Some are trying to spin that into a big deal. Others are honest enough to point out that the same software contains thousands of runways all over the world in practically every region.

The last Microsoft Flight Simulator release (the development of which has since been taken up by Lockheed Martin) contained over 24,000 unique airfields, civillian and military, and there would be literally hundreds of thousands of additions to that created by enthusiasts and commercial companies.

I'm reading the initial release of incorrect information regarding the termination of the ACARS transmissions as an intentional mislead.

Also noteworthy is that apparently the Chinese have been late to the party in terms of checking their territory for errant Boeings. They're now conducting an inland search on the assumption that they didn't catch it slip through their primary radar systems.

Out-of-fuel aircraft crashing produce surprisingly little fire, and depending on the angle of impact, SAR teams may be looking for an impact and debris site on land as small as 50x50m. If it's in the ocean, if it isn't found in the next two weeks, it probably won't be found for decades.

[Biggus]

While I haven't done it yet, I would bet that the plot of the known 2013 route of both ships would be interesting when added to the map of the known flight information. Right around a year before MH370 went missing, those two ships were the first ship Iranian naval ships to traverse the Straight of Malacca since 1979.

If I was writing this as a novel, I would be using the Iranian's claim that they identified 370 surface and subsurface vessels on the 2013 mission as a plot piece, but in reality I would guess it means that they saw some boats that they were able to identify as such.

Possibly coincidentally, a Russian SIGINT ship has been in port in both Venezuela and Cuba this month. Presumably to monitor our reactions to the Iranian vessels.

I've spent a couple of hours considering that it's possible that the Iranian ships were in the area, and what their actions could possibly be should they decide that MH370 was a threat or otherwise a target.

Here's my problem: What armaments would either ship carry that could engage an airliner at 35kft? Both ships have basic AAA, conceivably they might have a few MANPADs, but firing a Strela at a target at FL350 is a bit like attempting to snipe someone a mile away with a .22LR.

So we'd be left with some sort of electronic warfare scenario.

I'm not discounting it, because there were a few other irregularities in the area in terms of transponder discrepancies. Not terribly unusual, but they were all in the same area around the same time.

[former_0302]

If it's in the ocean, if it isn't found in the next two weeks, it probably won't be found for decades.

I've got to disagree with you. If they do, in fact, have a circle like Dayuhan posted in post #42 of this thread for every hour that the plane was in flight, they either already have a very good idea where the plane ended up or they just haven't talked to anybody who knows a bit about geometry yet. If they have that info, it's just a math problem, and not a particularly hard one.

Which is why, as you alluded to in an earlier post, it is kind of suspicious that they only released the last arc, and not the previous ones.

EDIT: As I think about this more, it's a fairly easy problem IF the plane was going in more or less of a straight line after last contact. If it was following a weird, broken route, or circling, it becomes a lot more difficult, but still not impossible.

[anotherguy]

Now the Thai Air Force is stating that they picked up a twisting path of an unidentified craft, but didn't provide the information because they weren't specifically asked for it. Makes one wonder who else is holding information.

Additionally, a low flying plane was spotted by multiple people over the Maldives at 0615 the morning of the disappearance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10704769/Malaysian-Airlines-MH370-live.html

[slapout9]

Of course that's not impossible (not much is, at this point) but there seems to be no publicly available evidence at all to suggest such a problem. The allegation that his family moved out seems to go back to a subdivision security guard saying that they'd left the house and a tabloid reporter spinning a story out of it. There's no reason at all to suppose he's gay... so it really doesn't get us anywhere beyond idle speculation.

Except the jailed political leader is now admitting he is related to the pilot. Which doesn't make him guilty of anything but why keep it secret for so long?

[slapout9]

I disagree that logic an reason aren't relevant, particularly if someone is calculatedly stealing an aircraft and disappearing. It doesn't account for every single possibility, but it's a good place to start.

I understand that and it is perfectly OK to have that point of view especially with your extensive technical background.



You sure about that? The hardware answers are incredibly compelling. We now know that the ACARS radio links were not disabled before last voice contact. We've got a radar track that shows the aircraft turning off to the best possible shot at a safe landing at Langkawi and a bunch of stuff that looks like shutting down systems in the cockpit to eliminate a fire, which they may have managed to do, but not before succumbing to asphyxia or hypoxia.

The hardware answers look far less like terrorism.

I am not sure about any of this. I simply propose certain theories and then let people comment on them as far as their possible accuracy or inaccuracy.

[TheCurmudgeon]

This is what I was saying yesterday. ACARS radio links weren't disabled prior to last voice contact.

With that change, electrical/computer failures are back on the table.

I actually considered the possibility that the rapid climb (tied to an intentional depressurization) was an intentional attempt to starve the fire of oxygen - as unlikely as that would be. More likely that the radar data is flawed.



The hardware answers are incredibly compelling. We now know that the ACARS radio links were not disabled before last voice contact. We've got a radar track that shows the aircraft turning off to the best possible shot at a safe landing at Langkawi and a bunch of stuff that looks like shutting down systems in the cockpit to eliminate a fire, which they may have managed to do, but not before succumbing to asphyxia or hypoxia.

The hardware answers look far less like terrorism.

Lets say that there was a fire,

1) why no Mayday? Aren't there backup comms systems? Aren't there automatic systems that would communicate a fire on board?

2) why the continued course changes? I suppose the system could have continued to degrade, but it seems odd (assuming there is any credibility to the radar information, a dangerous assumption based on recent events).

[Stan]

I seem to remember that the western Sahara has been the site of many "lost" aircraft landings from drug smugglers flying over from South America.

Yo Dude, long time no see (or hear) ! How goes the war ?

Ain't that the truth. How many air frames vegetate in Africa, either sold or cannibalized.

Given that scenario however would require a few in flight refueling (or one hell of a tail wind) :eek:

[former_0302]

Interesting take on the situation from a pilot:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

[TheCurmudgeon]

Assuming the fire scenario, and the pilot/copilot had enough time to turn the plane, would they not also place the plane on a glide path to the airport, or does that require too much additional data entry?

[slapout9]

Wouldn't the pilot call out some type of mayday call signal to alert the airport of an emergancy landing?

[wm]

Yo Dude, long time no see (or hear) ! How goes the war ?

Ain't that the truth. How many air frames vegetate in Africa, either sold or cannibalized.

Given that scenario however would require a few in flight refueling (or one hell of a tail wind) :eek:

Depends on what is being smuggled and how far it needed to move. Might have been on the plane when it left Kuala Lumpur.

[omarali50]

This plane is now in the twilight zone and we will probably never have near-consensus on what happened, but I was thinking: all this speculation must have given several people some very interesting new ideas...

[Biggus]

Lets say that there was a fire,

1) why no Mayday? Aren't there backup comms systems? Aren't there automatic systems that would communicate a fire on board?

2) why the continued course changes? I suppose the system could have continued to degrade, but it seems odd (assuming there is any credibility to the radar information, a dangerous assumption based on recent events).

Priorities in order of importance are to aviate, navigate and then communicate. From the perspective of the crew, an electrical fire is going to result in immediately depowering large chunks of avionics and comms equipment and then powering one thing at a time back up until the relevant system is found. The system you'd expect to automatically report a fire to the outside world is ACARS, and we know that didn't work for whatever reason.

No mayday could be easily chalked up to either being overtaken by events in fighting the fire or the fire knocking the radio comms out. There are a number of different radios onboard, but the breakers would be pulled at the same time.

Course changes beyond the radar tracking are likely to be the aircraft following the active plan in the FMS, whatever that might have been. Like I hypothesised earlier, getting off the airway while troubleshooting items that include the transponder would be a key priority. Punch in a few nearby waypoints that sound reasonably acceptable (and under increasingly hypoxic conditions, strange things can sound reasonably acceptable) and begin dealing with the fire/decompression/whatever.

Or the radar tracking is disinformation or a cover to explain how the aircraft got to it's present position without compromising someone's capability.


Assuming the fire scenario, and the pilot/copilot had enough time to turn the plane, would they not also place the plane on a glide path to the airport, or does that require too much additional data entry?

From their last tracked position, going back to KL would mean clearing some obstructions on approach. Langkawi was the nearest reasonably safe approach available at the time, from what I understand. That's the direction the aircraft was initially heading.


Wouldn't the pilot call out some type of mayday call signal to alert the airport of an emergancy landing?

As I've said above, communication is third priority in line after getting a handle on aviation and navigation. If ACARS VHF and HF datalinks are out, voice comms are probably out too, but that shouldn't matter too much, because there are lost comms procedures. How these lost comms procedures work with loss of transponder, I don't really know.

I think it's extremely important to point out that this scenario is basically a one-in-a-million perfect storm, if this is what has happened.


This plane is now in the twilight zone and we will probably never have near-consensus on what happened, but I was thinking: all this speculation must have given several people some very interesting new ideas...
Probably true.


Something else that I've found interesting today is the relationship between Malaysia and Thailand, sharing radar data 10 days after the disappearance.

I'm also learning that a number of SAR aircraft are currently sitting on the ground awaiting overflight clearance from neighbouring countries.

[TheCurmudgeon]

From their last tracked position, going back to KL would mean clearing some obstructions on approach. Langkawi was the nearest reasonably safe approach available at the time, from what I understand. That's the direction the aircraft was initially heading.

I understand the reason for the heading, but why remain at the same altitude. Wouldn't you tell the computer that you were going to land, allowing not only the direction but the altitude of the plane to change automatically. From what I have read the 777 is capable of landing itself if programed. Would you not want to tell the plane that you were going to land, or would that take too much effort?

[anotherguy]

From what I have read the 777 is capable of landing itself if programed. Would you not want to tell the plane that you were going to land, or would that take too much effort?

It would presumably be the only option so I would think that for whatever reason it wasn't a possibility be it the crew or hardware was no longer operational. Given that the plane will find 0 AGL on its own at some point, I couldn't imagine fighting to get that done until it just wasn't possible or I was dead instead of spending 7 hellish hours waiting to fall out of the sky.

[TheCurmudgeon]

It would presumably be the only option so I would think that for whatever reason it wasn't a possibility be it the crew or hardware was no longer operational. Given that the plane will find 0 AGL on its own at some point, I couldn't imagine fighting to get that done until it just wasn't possible or I was dead instead of spending 7 hellish hours waiting to fall out of the sky.

At this point the most probable explination is electrical fire, assuming the timeline is correct. I can discount the strange altitude changes as radar error. But now you start looking at the "if a, then b" sequence. If fire, then you would expect a mayday. None receive, but explainable as crisis in the cockpit along with electrical issues. Yet still, the pilot/copilot had time to puch a new heading into the computer. If I was after the closest airport, then I would want to drop altitude. If I was not sure I could make it I would want to drop altitude and speed.

I don't know, I am not a commercial pilot familiar with proceedure, so I ask.

[Biggus]

I understand the reason for the heading, but why remain at the same altitude. Wouldn't you tell the computer that you were going to land, allowing not only the direction but the altitude of the plane to change automatically. From what I have read the 777 is capable of landing itself if programed. Would you not want to tell the plane that you were going to land, or would that take too much effort?

It'd entirely depend on how that initial couple of minutes played out. You can plug the waypoint in without saying 'I plan on landing here pretty soon' to the FMS. It's not incredibly hard to set a different alt for a given waypoint if you have the time to do it.


It would presumably be the only option so I would think that for whatever reason it wasn't a possibility be it the crew or hardware was no longer operational. Given that the plane will find 0 AGL on its own at some point, I couldn't imagine fighting to get that done until it just wasn't possible or I was dead instead of spending 7 hellish hours waiting to fall out of the sky.

That's more or less my impression, if I'm understanding you correctly. Do what you need to do to get the aircraft to remain airborne (mission accomplished to one degree or another), but die before positive results are evident.


At this point the most probable explination is electrical fire, assuming the timeline is correct. I can discount the strange altitude changes as radar error. But now you start looking at the "if a, then b" sequence. If fire, then you would expect a mayday. None receive, but explainable as crisis in the cockpit along with electrical issues. Yet still, the pilot/copilot had time to puch a new heading into the computer. If I was after the closest airport, then I would want to drop altitude. If I was not sure I could make it I would want to drop altitude and speed.

I don't know, I am not a commercial pilot familiar with proceedure, so I ask.
Communicating 'mayday' is a tertiary objective. You pull those radio circuit breakers (along with a heap of others) ASAP when you're fighting to survive. Getting off the flightpath was one of the first steps you'd take if you're pulling the transponder CB in making sure that your current emergency isn't suddenly made into a secondary issue when you smack into another airliner. You don't wait for the fire to get worse so you can tell everyone where to find your body, you do your best *right now* to ensure that your body remains alive and disable the radio.

In terms of time to plug in a waypoint for the nearest useful runway in the FMS, it's surprisingly quick to do. Only a matter of a few keystrokes. It would probably have been done whilst the other driver was pulling the breakers.

Regarding the altitude radar data, I don't really know what to make of it. I know radar isn't perfectly accurate at times, but I still scratch my head at the track being as wrong as it apparently was. I have heard that the subsequent descent was staggered which would make sense, but I am unsure that this was confirmed.

Dropping speed and alt aren't necessarily a good thing in an emergency. If I thought there was a risk that I'd be gliding soon and I wasn't spoiled for choice in terms of places to land, I probably wouldn't slow down and descend. If you lose motive power, altitude gives you a chance to maintain a glide. If you descend, you no longer have the altitude to trade for lateral speed, and your glide will soon become a stall from which you can't recover.

[AmericanPride]

How is it known what inputs were placed in the navigation computer? The electrical fire theory can't be ruled out from what I know of the situation, but it seems to not be consistent with the flight pattern and lack of surface debris. Also, if there was a electrical fire that disabled the cockpit and crew, what prevented it from spreading over the next 7 hours?

[anotherguy]

That's more or less my impression, if I'm understanding you correctly. Do what you need to do to get the aircraft to remain airborne (mission accomplished to one degree or another), but die before positive results are evident.

Should have read "couldn't imagine NOT fighting."

[slapout9]

Interesting interview of Retired USAF General Tom McInerney about how missing flight 370 is in Pakistan. Second time in a row he has made this statement.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/19/retired-air-force-general-stand-by-theory-malaysian-airlines-flight-could-have-landed-in-pakistan/#!

[ganulv]

Interesting interview of Retired USAF General Tom McInerney about how missing flight 370 is in Pakistan. Second time in a row he has made this statement.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/19/retired-air-force-general-stand-by-theory-malaysian-airlines-flight-could-have-landed-in-pakistan/#!

What a wingnut. ;)

[jcustis]

Good grief. Someone needs to keep him from getting in front of a microphone.

[slapout9]

What a wingnut. ;)


Maybe he is and then again maybe not. We did it to Korean Flt. 007 why not Malaysian Flt. 370?
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/03/19/judge-napolitanos-take-nsa-time-machine-can-record-all-foreign-countrys-calls

[anotherguy]

I think we have reached or are getting close to the point where any useful information that is going to be made public is already out there unless the plane reappears in one way or another. All the "experts" are coming out of the woodwork to get air time and column inches and the media isn't done with the story so now they are willing to run whatever someone who is tangentially qualified has to say on the issue.

That said, I would be willing to bet that there is a fair amount of information that will not be made public.

[davidbfpo]

Given the reported sighting over the Maldives, I wonder if their air traffic radar was working at that time of the morning. If anyone else comes forward to say "me too", after all there are tourists there. Seems a logical place to calculate potential flying time left and conduct a SAR search.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Well, she went somewhere. While the odds are with an electrical fire, we can not rule out that it was taken by unknown parties for a purpose yet to be disclosed.

[AmericanPride]

Well, she went somewhere. While the odds are with an electrical fire, we can not rule out that it was taken by unknown parties for a purpose yet to be disclosed.

I'm skeptical of the electrical fire theory primarily because of the maneuvers of the aircraft after it crossed the Malaysian Peninsula. In the 1.5 hours after the last radio contact, the aircraft turned West, crossed the Peninsula, and then turned northwest, where it disappeared from radar. Also, it appears that the band based on the last satellite signal is consistent with the location of the last transponder message east of the Peninsula, whereas the last radar contact had the aircraft heading northwest after having crossed the Peninsula. But I'm not a pilot or geo-spatial analyst, so my amateur reading of the images could very well be incorrect.

Is it possible that an electrical fire disabled a combination of systems that enabled the crew to fly (in the sense of remaining airborne) but not navigate or communicate? If the turn was due to computer programming and in search of a sanctuary airport, what happens to the aircraft when (1) the auto-pilot cannot physically direct the aircraft to the programmed location or (2) the auto-pilot misses the destination and/or runs out of waypoints?

[former_0302]

Update just came across Fox News at 2025 PDT that the Aussies have found two "objects" that they think may be from the plane... FWIW. No info about location other than "off the coast of Australia." You'd think they'd be pretty sure if they're going to release that statement though...

EDIT: Apparently it comes from the Australian PM.

[Biggus]

How is it known what inputs were placed in the navigation computer? The electrical fire theory can't be ruled out from what I know of the situation, but it seems to not be consistent with the flight pattern and lack of surface debris. Also, if there was a electrical fire that disabled the cockpit and crew, what prevented it from spreading over the next 7 hours?

AFAIK ACARS will normally upload information about the waypoint currently active, and the next one.

Perhaps pulling the breakers was enough to put it out, but only after the situation had killed the crew. That's the only way I can see it happening.


Given the reported sighting over the Maldives, I wonder if their air traffic radar was working at that time of the morning. If anyone else comes forward to say "me too", after all there are tourists there. Seems a logical place to calculate potential flying time left and conduct a SAR search.

The Maldives sighting was apparently false (http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/maldives-police-probe-reports-of-mh370-sighting/article1-1196984.aspx).



Is it possible that an electrical fire disabled a combination of systems that enabled the crew to fly (in the sense of remaining airborne) but not navigate or communicate? If the turn was due to computer programming and in search of a sanctuary airport, what happens to the aircraft when (1) the auto-pilot cannot physically direct the aircraft to the programmed location or (2) the auto-pilot misses the destination and/or runs out of waypoints?

It depends entirely on how the FMS is programmed and whether the AP mode has been changed from following the FMS plan to a simple heading mode at some point. If it's just been an inserted waypoint in an active flight plan, then you'd expect the aircraft to carry on towards the subsequent waypoints following the inserted point. As to what happens when you run out of waypoints, I don't know. It's not something that I've fiddled much with.

The turn to the west is consistent with providing the crew with the best chance at a shot at landing at Langkawi or Penang, which would be safer than heading back to Kuala Lumpur, which has a few high ridgelines to clear.


Update just came across Fox News at 2025 PDT that the Aussies have found two "objects" that they think may be from the plane... FWIW. No info about location other than "off the coast of Australia." You'd think they'd be pretty sure if they're going to release that statement though...

EDIT: Apparently it comes from the Australian PM.

There's been a few P-3 sorties out there today, and as far as I know there's an RNZAF P-3 out there now. Apparently the weather isn't particularly favourable for a search, but if nothing else they'll be dropping sonobuoys and listening for ELT signals.

Hopefully this will be resolved soon. I won't hold my breath, though.

[AmericanPride]

The debris was apparently spotted by satellite (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/03/20/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-satellite-objects/6641689/) and a Norwegian vessel is on scene now.


The turn to the west is consistent with providing the crew with the best chance at a shot at landing at Langkawi or Penang, which would be safer than heading back to Kuala Lumpur, which has a few high ridgelines to clear.

I understand that, hence my questions concerning navigation etc, since it is clear the aircraft either did not intend to land at either of those locations or that it was unable to do so due to technical failures or crew incapacitation. If the aircraft cannot physically be directed to the waypoints in the auto-pilot, does auto-pilot shut off or does it attempt to navigate the aircraft towards the waypoint and the aircraft ends up trying to fulfill that destination? I.e. if it had to turn 70 degrees but could only turn 30, would it turn 30 or would it shut off?

[Biggus]

If the aircraft cannot physically be directed to the waypoints in the auto-pilot, does auto-pilot shut off or does it attempt to navigate the aircraft towards the waypoint and the aircraft ends up trying to fulfill that destination? I.e. if it had to turn 70 degrees but could only turn 30, would it turn 30 or would it shut off?

(Preface: I've never tried to plug a set of WPs into any FMS that were going to require the sort of flightpath we're talking about here. With that said, here's what I believe having spent a little time on a few sims and way too much time looking at FMC/S documentation.)

The AP won't shut down at that point. If you're that close to the waypoint that you are going to require a very large direction change to reach it, then it would likely consider that waypoint as being overflown and activate the next one.

I've been doing a little bit of reading on the 777-200's FMS today. I've just learned that when out of waypoints, the AP will hold the last heading.

I've also heard a bit of speculation regarding the search area 1500nm off Perth. 40.7140° S, 85.6494° E roughly. When you change the 'S' to an 'N', you end up with a coordinate somewhere in Xinjiang province. Read into that what you will. Grasping at straws, or hijacking fumbled by a typo.

[AdamG]

Interesting take from the Malaysian press -


Malaysia's missing-plane crisis has exposed the shortcomings of a ruling regime already wrestling with a rapidly shrinking support base, fierce racial divisions and international criticism of its tough handling of political opponents.

The same government has ruled since Malaysia's birth in 1957, and political observers said its much-criticised response to the jet drama is symptomatic of years of institutional atrophy under an ethnic Malay elite known for cronyism.

Analysts said rancour over the still-unexplained disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 and its 239 people, two-thirds of whom were Chinese, could also complicate plans to draw closer to China – Malaysia's biggest trading partner and a growing source of tourist revenue.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/airliner-crisis-compounds-malaysian-governments-woes


Did we set up a betting board yet for "Most Likely/Most Dangerous"?

[davidbfpo]

I appreciate SAR missions can and often involve unexpected partners, but the arrival at Perth, Western Australia of two Chinese IL-76 planes must be an example:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10710250/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-March-22-as-it-happened.html

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02860/Malaysia-Ilyushins_2860182c.jpg

[carl]

P-8s and IL-76s, both jets. I would imagine, but don't know, that this kind of search would require flying at low altitude fairly slowly. The Australian and New Zealand P-3s can do that without a huge increase in fuel consumption but normally jets can't. It will be interesting to see how the jets do in comparison to the turboprops since we are going to jets for the maritime patrol role.

[jcustis]

It would seem the Chinese jets are there to provide stores for the task force it has sent to the region, or at least to support some other sort of package.

[Biggus]

I appreciate SAR missions can and often involve unexpected partners, but the arrival at Perth, Western Australia of two Chinese IL-76 planes must be an example:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10710250/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-March-22-as-it-happened.html

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02860/Malaysia-Ilyushins_2860182c.jpg
There's a rumour that the Chinese jets landed at Perth instead of RAAF Pearce, despite some fairly serious protests by the ATC. This may be a very interesting cooperative SAR effort.


P-8s and IL-76s, both jets. I would imagine, but don't know, that this kind of search would require flying at low altitude fairly slowly. The Australian and New Zealand P-3s can do that without a huge increase in fuel consumption but normally jets can't. It will be interesting to see how the jets do in comparison to the turboprops since we are going to jets for the maritime patrol role.
As a lifelong Orion (and Neptune) fan, I have a hard time believing what I'm about to say: I think this is probably one area where the Poseidon may have an advantage. It will have shorter transit times to the area of operations, it is able to be refuelled in-flight, and it's capable of carrying a relief crew. It's not the world's worst choice for this particular case. It might be butt-ugly, graceless and devoid of character, unsuited to low-level work just above the waves, but it does have a few upsides.

What good the Chinese are going to do remains to be seen. I understand they lost a Y-8 in the sort of weather conditions to be expected out over the search area some time ago. I am cautiously optimistic that everyone will work from the same sheet of music.

[jcustis]

Biggus,

As you are about to shift into your winter, when does that transition typically hit? Is there any appreciable effect on the open water out in the current search area (i.e. is there a race against Mother Nature's clock as well?)?

[carl]

A thought occurred to me. The airplane appears to have been flown into one of the most remote parts of the world's oceans. If it was intentional and not because of an accident, whoever headed it out there must have known how out of the way it was. Why would they have done that?

[Biggus]

Biggus,

As you are about to shift into your winter, when does that transition typically hit? Is there any appreciable effect on the open water out in the current search area (i.e. is there a race against Mother Nature's clock as well?)?

Tough call, I haven't spent enough time on the west coast to really say. I know that it's rough in the search area at the best of times, but I couldn't give you an accurate answer.


A thought occurred to me. The airplane appears to have been flown into one of the most remote parts of the world's oceans. If it was intentional and not because of an accident, whoever headed it out there must have known how out of the way it was. Why would they have done that?
Well, suicide whilst preserving a life insurance policy would probably be a good explanation if it was intentional and malicious.

[davidbfpo]

An explanation from Inmarsat how they concluded the flight ended in the Indian Ocean off Australia:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10719304/How-British-satellite-company-Inmarsat-tracked-down-MH370.html

I note this passage negates the data passed back to Rolls Royce:
..one of Inmarsat’s satellites continued to pick up a series of automated hourly 'pings' from a terminal on the plane, which would normally be used to synchronise timing information.

[davidbfpo]

Apparently Rolls-Royce engines are all equipped with a box that transmits automatically, probably each hour, a variety of data: engine data, position data, instructions and a unnamed function. Airlines are aware the box is fitted and it would be visible in any strip-down, but the box remains R-R property. Malaysian Airlines did not pay R-R for this data to be transmitted, collected and analysed. Some nations insist - legally - that this data be collected.

[slapout9]

A thought occurred to me. The airplane appears to have been flown into one of the most remote parts of the world's oceans. If it was intentional and not because of an accident, whoever headed it out there must have known how out of the way it was. Why would they have done that?

In one case it would be to destroy evidence. This could be true for a pure criminal activity as well as some type of terrorist plan that went wrong. Or to just make a mess, similar to a mass murder type situation where the whole point is to cause pain, which is why being logical is not going to get you very far when it comes to a motive.

[Dayuhan]

Sober assessment of the challenges of finding the airplane:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10712857/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-Air-France-investigator-warns-of-colossal-task.html

We can speculate all we want on the question of why anyone would deliberately fly the plane into an empty ocean. There remains a strong possibility that it was not done deliberately, that a bungled hijack, fire, or other failure left the crew and passengers dead or incapacitated and the plane ran on its own until the fuel ran out. To me that looks like the "Occam's Razor" explanation, but of course we won't know until the plane is recovered.

This incident could result in the introduction of automated systems that would send alerts or activate independent tracking systems if a pilot s incapacitated. Heavy equipment manufacturers are already introducing systems that monitor operators for signs of fatigue, seems entirely possible to adapt those for aircraft.

I've seen it mentioned that data recorders only record data for the last 60 minutes of flight, and may have erased the relevant sections. Does anyone know why that's the case? Given the state of compact data storage these days it's hard to believe that they can't include enough capacity to record data for an entire flight.

[Biggus]

Apparently Rolls-Royce engines are all equipped with a box that transmits automatically, probably each hour, a variety of data: engine data, position data, instructions and a unnamed function. Airlines are aware the box is fitted and it would be visible in any strip-down, but the box remains R-R property. Malaysian Airlines did not pay R-R for this data to be transmitted, collected and analysed. Some nations insist - legally - that this data be collected.

This link (http://www.rolls-royce.com/about/technology/systems_tech/monitoring_systems.jsp) may provide some useful information on the topic.

The system you are speaking of is tied in with ACARS and primarily (and likely only) uses ACARS to report on systems health via a number of different mediums (VHF, HF and SATCOM). There are airline-specific procedures that might or might not force the ACARS system to report by SATCOM only. My understanding is that MAS is not subscribed to the SATCOM reporting feature, but is subscribed to one of the VHF/HF ground based services. I am trying to get my head around why MAS might try to force ACARS into a transmission mode that it isn't subscribed to, and I haven't yet arrived at a satisfactory answer.

I believe we will see some changes in the operation of ACARS as a result of this event. I sincerely hope that whatever changes are made don't contribute to the risk of future losses. Every time I hear a talking head demanding that transponders become a system that cannot be turned off from the cockpit, I feel somewhat nauseous.



I've seen it mentioned that data recorders only record data for the last 60 minutes of flight, and may have erased the relevant sections. Does anyone know why that's the case? Given the state of compact data storage these days it's hard to believe that they can't include enough capacity to record data for an entire flight.

Part of the issue is that while data storage is incredibly cheap generally in comparison to a decade ago, FDR and CVR systems need to be able to withstand fairly massive impact (I believe the spec is in the range of 15+G) amongst other things. Airlines are not known for spending a cent more than they need to these days, unfortunately. I do not doubt that larger data storage equipment that can withstand the demands of FDR and CVR specs exist, but without some sort of legal requirement to upgrade, I doubt that we will see much change. This isn't the first time where such an improvement would be beneficial, and it probably won't be the last.

[flagg]

Sober assessment of the challenges of finding the airplane:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10712857/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-Air-France-investigator-warns-of-colossal-task.html

We can speculate all we want on the question of why anyone would deliberately fly the plane into an empty ocean. There remains a strong possibility that it was not done deliberately, that a bungled hijack, fire, or other failure left the crew and passengers dead or incapacitated and the plane ran on its own until the fuel ran out. To me that looks like the "Occam's Razor" explanation, but of course we won't know until the plane is recovered.

This incident could result in the introduction of automated systems that would send alerts or activate independent tracking systems if a pilot s incapacitated. Heavy equipment manufacturers are already introducing systems that monitor operators for signs of fatigue, seems entirely possible to adapt those for aircraft.

I've seen it mentioned that data recorders only record data for the last 60 minutes of flight, and may have erased the relevant sections. Does anyone know why that's the case? Given the state of compact data storage these days it's hard to believe that they can't include enough capacity to record data for an entire flight.

Where's Malcolm Gladwell and his Wisdom of Crowds when we need him?

I remember in his book he used the example of the USS Scorpion and the use of bayesian Search Theory/Wisdom of Crowds(specialist).

[surika]

Flight MH370 took off from Kuala Lumpur (http://www.tiket.com) at 12:41 a.m. Saturday en route to Beijing. Somewhere between Malaysia and Vietnam, the plane carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew members lost contact with ground controllers.http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/mystery-of-missing-malaysia-airlines-jet-deepens-1.1721681#ixzz2vg6fEyRg

Still no trace of the aircraft repoprted, search in its 3rd day.

I don't know where, but today I read that they somehow catched a signal that, judging from the canal it was on, must be said black box.. or at least they're pretty sure about it

[davidbfpo]

The interpretation of data is not always a smooth path, nor scientific. A WSJ article 'Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Search Zone Poised for Another Shift: Uncertainties About Speed, Altitude Affect Calculations for Target Area':http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-search-zone-poised-for-another-shift-1402272687-lMyQjAxMTA0MDAwODEwNDgyWj

[Firn]

Sadly Occam's Razor points, like in the case of MH370 and others before, towards another deliberate crash (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/world/europe/germanwings-crash.html?_r=0). The BBC asks Who, What, Why: How are cockpit doors locked? (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-32070528) The embedded video makes it quite easy to understand...


After 9/11, changes were made to the security of cockpits in an effort to make hijackings more difficult. According to the US Federal Aviation Authority, doors should typically be tough enough to withstand a grenade blast. They are usually left locked throughout the flight.

The high level of security against an outside threat makes it impossible to enter if somebody inside the cockpit desires so. The risk of a deliberate crash, among other factors is likely greatly reduced by strict enforcement of the rule of two. In this case it seems that the co-pilot was alone for a many minutes with the door locked during which time the autopilot was manipulated into crashing.

Wrapping it up there have been a considerable numbers of cases in the last twenty years in which the pilots are at least suspected to have crashed their plane deliberately. Terrorism has led to a extremely costly and very intrusive response around the world and especially in the USA. It surprises* me that at least in Europe the institutional reaction to suspected 'massacres-by-pilots' which might have gone a long way towards reducing that low threat much further while spending not even a fraction of the anti-terrorism costs was not stronger and smarter.

*There obviously some explanations coming into one's mind, but I wonder what others think.

[Firn]

I find that quote remarkable:


According to cockpit voice recordings reported by the International Business Times, the co-pilot left to use the bathroom, and when he returned, he found the door shut. Inside, the pilot had switched the plane’s altitude reading from 38,000 feet to ground level, IBT reports. Recordings show someone pounded on the door to the cockpit as the plane plummeted. Investigators later concluded the plane had crashed because of “intentional actions by the pilot.”











Why? Because it is from an article written one year ago (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/03/11/just-how-common-are-pilot-suicides/), following the tragedy of MH370 and talking about the Mozambique Airlines E-190 crash of 2013.

[davidbfpo]

A cautionary comment from Mental Health Cop, a British police inspector who has specialised in mental health:https://mentalhealthcop.wordpress.com/2015/03/28/nature-or-degree/

Here is one passage:
By now, it may be easy to forget that when papers went to press on Thursday night, we still knew comparatively little about the pilot of the doomed flight. We certainly did not know that he appears to have ripped up sick notes that were relevant to the day of the crash or what kind of condition they related to – we still don’t, as the German police have not confirmed it. Whilst we did have suggestion that he had experience of depression and ‘burnout’ – whatever that means – we don’t know the nature or degree of this, do we?