Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"

[Ali G]

andy_s said:

Almost certainly classified technology from disparate powers that the countries in question want to keep, ironically, below the radar.

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's just common sense and we shouldn't expect to know all the details, obviously.

Journalists and bloggers will exploit this as some sort of inside knowledge or unseen hand/dark knowledge. It's nothing more than just how things work and nothing to get too excited about.

Simply provides a rational for a sub to be in an out of the way place and which would have had a decent chance of detecting the crash or black box 'ping'.

No conspiracy theories and no tinfoil hat required.

[anonymous-user]

i was reading about how they could locate the plane based on the handshakes which is pretty amazing stuff. basically looking at other handshakes from planes on the same day at know locations, they could work out the direction of the plane and speed and height based on the one ping, looking at the frequency, very clever stuff. (british lead as well)

the final handshake, basically hitting the water, this data in theory could give a location, which would explain the quick turnaround in black box location, but all theoretical.

If i remember rightly the worked out on the 14th march it was 1000 km north of Perth, so i think the plane wasn't as lost as first thought, but these are still rough estimates, but based on maths.

the one thing is clear there could be no conspiracy as they made a balls of this whole cover up.

read it all here
http://mh370.dca.gov.my/information-provided-to-mh...

Edited by The Spruce goose on Monday 14th April 19:23

[hidetheelephants]

Ali G said:

Ken Sington said:

This might have been asked previously but I am not wading through 70 odd pages to find out; are the oceans of the world not full of hunter killer submarines stooging about that have the capability of hearing a cod burp 100 miles away, and what's more, being able to tell what it had for breakfast? Surely one of those would do a better job of locating the source of the pings than a surface ship?

Or is this just another Robert Ludlum Bourne type lllusion regarding surveillance capabilities?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomrogan/1002668...

Plausible?

Not terribly; Tireless wasn't fitted with 2076 because she's due to be decommissioned shortly, so it wasn't worth the expense of fitting it. The newer T-boats in better condition are staying in service longer so it was worth the expense. The odds that the MoD have
a) found the money to do the conversion
b) managed to let the contract without telling anyone or having it appear as an exposé in the papers
c) decided that keeping it a secret would be a good idea given it's public knowledge the 2076 is installed on three other T-boats are a bit less than me winning the Euromillions and the Lotto in consecutive weeks.

[TTmonkey]

andy_s said:

TTmonkey said:

It's called "the long game". What will he public think in two years time when it's happened 6, 7 or 8 times....? They will start getting anxious about long distance travel.... No one likes the unexplained.

9/11 was planned and implemented over a number of years. Perhaps we are seeing the first parts of this unfolding.

Just an idea, to try to give some kind of reason to an incident that so far, after weeks of investigation, no one has put any solid answers to.

I think it's the 'talking out of your arse' game.

There're easy explanations for the incident if we consider the human mind to be the most fallible piece of equipment on the aircraft.

Come on then put up your own explanations. We've had planes deliberately crashed by suicidal pilots on other occasions ..... And the plane has been found straight away. There's always debris, even when the suicide has been covered up with a technical reason.

In August 2001 plane travel was relatively safe and taken for granted. In September 2001 all planes were grounded for a week because we had a totally new kind of terrorism. The world changed that day. Who predicted it? Who knew it was about to happen? Yet Osama and his organisation had been planning it for nearly ten years without the security forces of the entire world finding out.

So what exactly is tin foil hat about my admittedly way out there overal theory? It doesn't rely on anything other than what's already known. It's probable that one or both pilots were involved. Whatever has happened it must have been thouraghly thought out and planned. Was that done soley by the person who flew the plane to the Indian Ocean, or was that planning done by more than one person? Could that pilot have been under pressure, or orders, from someone else? We don't know.

Why would someone kill all those passengers if all they want to do is kill themselves? Why is this plane impossible to find, what could be e reason for doing that? Insurance payout someone says..... But if that's the case it's easy enough for a pilot to just crash a plane and say something on the voice recorder such as 'the controls aren't working we're helpless omg were going to die' or just make some mistake.

I can't think of an explanation that currently fits with all the known facts. It didn't get lost by accident, it's been lost on purpose. What's the purpose?

[AreOut]

I'm still with my theory of confused hijacker setting autopilot wrongly.

http://stevang.tumblr.com/post/80630349384/ok-now-...

[anonymous-user]

AreOut said:

I'm still with my theory of confused hijacker setting autopilot wrongly.

http://stevang.tumblr.com/post/80630349384/ok-now-...

the route chosen flew around Indonesian radar/air space, but a hijacker with intelligence to do this then choose a location in the middle of the ocean, it makes zero sense..

a 99 percent certainty is it ran out of fuel and crashed which on the trajectory could indicate a hijack without knowledge of fuel left but is most unlikely considering it was flown nearly 2 hours over the expected Bejing touchdown time.

Edited by The Spruce goose on Monday 14th April 21:30

[thehawk]

AreOut said:

I'm still with my theory of confused hijacker setting autopilot wrongly.

http://stevang.tumblr.com/post/80630349384/ok-now-...

So obviously quite an intelligent person, to be able to pull this off. He would have trained and prepared for this. But is incapable of reading something as simple as a compass heading.

[Jimbeaux]

thehawk said:

AreOut said:

I'm still with my theory of confused hijacker setting autopilot wrongly.

http://stevang.tumblr.com/post/80630349384/ok-now-...

So obviously quite an intelligent person, to be able to pull this off. He would have trained and prepared for this. But is incapable of reading something as simple as a compass heading.

A bit OT but find a person under 28 and they may not know what a compass is, or at least not be GPS is to the point people forget they can fail.

[oobster]

I may have imagined it, but I am fairly sure I saw a picture on US Airways twitter feed last night that tended to suggest a 777 had been found?

[-Z-]

AreOut said:

I'm still with my theory of confused hijacker setting autopilot wrongly.

http://stevang.tumblr.com/post/80630349384/ok-now-...

Erm isn't the search area now a massive distance away from the place referenced in your article which is 3 weeks old?

Which makes it irrelelevant?

[anonymous-user]

oobster said:

I may have imagined it, but I am fairly sure I saw a picture on US Airways twitter feed last night that tended to suggest a 777 had been found?

not in a women's orifice thou...

[EskimoArapaho]

oobster said:

I may have imagined it, but I am fairly sure I saw a picture on US Airways twitter feed last night that tended to suggest a 777 had been found?

You're a very bad man. Gullible PHers are going to Google for that photo...

[pingu393]

thehawk said:

So obviously quite an intelligent person, to be able to pull this off. He would have trained and prepared for this. But is incapable of reading something as simple as a compass heading.

It's very easy to read an analogue compass 180 wrong, but I'd be surprised if this is the case here as I think the readouts have a digital readout as well. If you believe the tale, it's how one of the first Atlantic flights was made.

[LotusMartin]

Possibly someone's said this already in the last 300 pages, but my money's on a cover up by Malaysian military. I bet they accidentally shot it down and tried to cover it up like the US did with TWA Flight 800 in 1996.

[Ozzie Osmond]

LotusMartin said:

I bet they accidentally shot it down and tried to cover it up like the US did with TWA Flight 800 in 1996.

That TWA Flight 800 story is pure conspiracy theory. I don't believe there's one shred of evidence that it was shot down.

On the other hand Korean Airlines flight 107 was definitely a shoot down by USSR. They denied it at first but more recently have simply stated that it was a fully justified interception.

[B17NNS]

LotusMartin said:

I bet they accidentally shot it down and tried to cover it up like the US did with TWA Flight 800 in 1996.

TWA 800 went down because of an electrical short in an empty tank.

[AreOut]

-Z- said:

Erm isn't the search area now a massive distance away from the place referenced in your article which is 3 weeks old?

Which makes it irrelelevant?

could be, I didn't check

[glazbagun]

Ozzie Osmond said:

LotusMartin said:

I bet they accidentally shot it down and tried to cover it up like the US did with TWA Flight 800 in 1996.

That TWA Flight 800 story is pure conspiracy theory. I don't believe there's one shred of evidence that it was shot down.

On the other hand Korean Airlines flight 107 was definitely a shoot down by USSR. They denied it at first but more recently have simply stated that it was a fully justified interception.

And there was Iran Air Flight 655. Some believe that it was the Iranians who bombed Pan Am flight 103 in retaliation. The US paid out over it but never issued a formal apology or acknowledgement of wrongdoing according to Wiki, which is pretty shabby.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[Pappa Lurve]

redtwin said:

Yeah, that would do it.

Reading this thread but not commented but that little exchange made me chuckle. Has politeness and accepting when someone really does know there stuff suddenly become allowed on PH?!

So anyone wanting to fill me in in case I have missed anything but there seems to be a number of people saying that this must be some kind of cover up due to lack of floating stuff. Or that the plane must have landed on the sea and people could have got out etc and pointing to some unknown at this time dark forces. So genuine question here - has anyone shown any real evidence of that which would compare to the chap stating it was not voered by radar as he had worked on those exact radar weapons systems things?!

Or feel free to ignore me and get back to the discussion - sorry for disturbing!

[AdeTuono]

AreOut said:

-Z- said:

Erm isn't the search area now a massive distance away from the place referenced in your article which is 3 weeks old?

Which makes it irrelelevant?

could be, I didn't check

Good to see that you've researched your theory thoroughly before posting.