Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
B17NNS said:
"Staggering new claims that doomed plane was blown out of the sky by US and Thai fighter jets in training drill gone wrong."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2631527/Ex...
To quote the Private eye cover after KAL007 was shot down by the Soviets.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2631527/Ex...
"I think we should get the full facts before we condemn the Americans'
Steffan said:
There are so much rumour and innuendo rolling about on this in reality, Who Knows? must surely be the current answer. I personally still favour the anoxia theory primarily because so far as I know that seems the most probable and least inventive.
too much evidence it didn't happenAssuming for a moment the wreckage is found, I think it will, but will take a long time, how much information will be recoverable from the FDR and CVR?
As is once they are in the water and the batteries are flat, how long will the unit survive sat on the sea bed and still give up useful data when recovered.
As is once they are in the water and the batteries are flat, how long will the unit survive sat on the sea bed and still give up useful data when recovered.
daddy cool said:
Steffan said:
From memory there was a Colombian plane that smashed to pieces in the mountains and was not found for over 20 years.
Do you mean "Stardust" in 1947? That was, and still is, a story im fascinated by. The plane actually hit the top of a mountain and sunk into the snow and ice. It was 50 years before the wreckage worked its way down the mountain inside a glacier, much of it (and some parts of the humans) very well preserved, and was then found thawed out.But while that 50 year old mystery was solved, the final piece isnt - why was the word "STENDEC" repeatedly transmitted in the moments before the crash?
If you wanted to read up about this story, why not listen to Willie Nelson performing his classic song "Stadust" while you do? Its nothing to do with the plane, but i like to pretend it is...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p01z2vhg/hori...
Megaflow said:
Assuming for a moment the wreckage is found, I think it will, but will take a long time, how much information will be recoverable from the FDR and CVR?
As is once they are in the water and the batteries are flat, how long will the unit survive sat on the sea bed and still give up useful data when recovered.
The solid state memory in the recorders is both incredibly robust (i'd imagine a 25year data retention time minimum unpowered) and it is designed to be "sealed" Ie the actual memory chips are completely "potted" on a pcb that is housed in an extremely strong metal cylinder that has glass sealed hermetic "pass through" connectors for the data. That means, even when unpowered, and under extreme pressure it will take a very very long time indeed for any damage to occur to the memory cells. Without any compressible pockets of air (except for micro fissures in the silcon die encapsulation) external pressure is simply transmitted straight through the device as if it were a solid object.As is once they are in the water and the batteries are flat, how long will the unit survive sat on the sea bed and still give up useful data when recovered.
Max_Torque said:
The solid state memory in the recorders is both incredibly robust (i'd imagine a 25year data retention time minimum unpowered) and it is designed to be "sealed" Ie the actual memory chips are completely "potted" on a pcb that is housed in an extremely strong metal cylinder that has glass sealed hermetic "pass through" connectors for the data. That means, even when unpowered, and under extreme pressure it will take a very very long time indeed for any damage to occur to the memory cells. Without any compressible pockets of air (except for micro fissures in the silcon die encapsulation) external pressure is simply transmitted straight through the device as if it were a solid object.
Thanks for that. Pretty much what I imagined, but wasn't sure.I haven't continued to follow this thread.
Could someone fill in some gaps fro me here (or correct my memory):
As far as I know the plane took off and was travelling north.
They have since found signs of it somewhere significantly south of where it set off (despite the fact it had set off going north.
THey have no idea whatsoever as to why it ended up where it did.
Is the above more or less right? Have they actually found specific debris they can attribute it to or not?
Is there a best theory yet?
Could someone fill in some gaps fro me here (or correct my memory):
As far as I know the plane took off and was travelling north.
They have since found signs of it somewhere significantly south of where it set off (despite the fact it had set off going north.
THey have no idea whatsoever as to why it ended up where it did.
Is the above more or less right? Have they actually found specific debris they can attribute it to or not?
Is there a best theory yet?
no debris at all, if Inmarsat is to be believed the plane sunk some thousand miles west of Australia
I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
AreOut said:
no debris at all, if Inmarsat is to be believed the plane sunk some thousand miles west of Australia
I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
It's far from safe to assume anything. Little strong evidence at all so far so assumptions are based on very flimsy info.I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
AreOut said:
no debris at all, if Inmarsat is to be believed the plane sunk some thousand miles west of Australia
I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
Are you adding this to all your other theories of what definitely happened? I think it's safe to conclude it was a hijack which involved pilot(s) because only they could execute a low-terrain flight over malaysian mainland to evade radars, maybe they were instigated by someone maybe it was his/their own decision for whatever reason.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff