Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
It might sound like a stupid question but has this been a very bad year for aviation in terms of accidents/incidents or is it just a case of a couple of high profile incidents that have brought more incidents into the eyes of the public through the media which we wouldn't normally hear about ?
lamboman100 said:
One famously landed intact on a big river, near the sea, a few years ago, of course.
It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Well, landing on a flat calm river is very different to landing in a churning sea. I'd like to see Sullenberger get the same result in those conditions It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Btw: "the force of the water impact tore holes in the plane's fuselage" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_154...
KTF said:
lamboman100 said:
One famously landed intact on a big river, near the sea, a few years ago, of course.
It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Well, landing on a flat calm river is very different to landing in a churning sea. I'd like to see Sullenberger get the same result in those conditions It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Btw: "the force of the water impact tore holes in the plane's fuselage" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_154...
Bar a few holes, the plane's structure was intact. There weren't bits of wing and engines flying about like in the movies.
lamboman100 said:
KTF said:
lamboman100 said:
One famously landed intact on a big river, near the sea, a few years ago, of course.
It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Well, landing on a flat calm river is very different to landing in a churning sea. I'd like to see Sullenberger get the same result in those conditions It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.
Btw: "the force of the water impact tore holes in the plane's fuselage" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_154...
Bar a few holes, the plane's structure was intact. There weren't bits of wing and engines flying about like in the movies.
Thankyou4calling said:
Months passed and not a single piece of debris washed up or any real evidence of what happened. Astonishing stuff.
Washed up where? I am not following how the currents work where it..... try another tack.What coast get what from what ocean currents and is anything in the sea a dead cert to wash up?
I understand there are a few currents that would swirl around.
Just asking.
Doh, how much of what coast line is monitored?
The Indian ocean is pretty huge.
Most bits would sink I'd imagine.
Not sure how well visited the west coast of Australia is? It is 600 miles long though...
Plus debris can go in any direction - India, Africa, Antarctica, probably less likely to be picked up and identified there than the Australia coastline.
Some bits/parts washed up might not be obviously part of MH370, blending in with all the other rubbish/crap that's washed up.
I'm sure something will be found eventually, but not surprising nothing has been found yet really...
Most bits would sink I'd imagine.
Not sure how well visited the west coast of Australia is? It is 600 miles long though...
Plus debris can go in any direction - India, Africa, Antarctica, probably less likely to be picked up and identified there than the Australia coastline.
Some bits/parts washed up might not be obviously part of MH370, blending in with all the other rubbish/crap that's washed up.
I'm sure something will be found eventually, but not surprising nothing has been found yet really...
I thought it had been agreed amongst the PH massive (the brainier ones at least) that it had reached a trans orbital velocity after popping out of a jet stream tailwind? The result being that it actually entered orbit and was unable to re-enter so is adrift in space. Probably halfway to Mars with only a few left alive after canibalism took hold.
uncle tez said:
It might sound like a stupid question but has this been a very bad year for aviation in terms of accidents/incidents or is it just a case of a couple of high profile incidents that have brought more incidents into the eyes of the public through the media which we wouldn't normally hear about ?
If you include the recent Taiwan crash and the Air Algerie crash in the Sahara, added to the 2 Malaysian incidents .. then yes it does look like a bad year. I think the Sahara one we would have heard about anyway, so I wouldn't say the profile was raised by the media .. but today we're not hearing much from the Sahara.dvs_dave said:
I thought it had been agreed amongst the PH massive (the brainier ones at least) that it had reached a trans orbital velocity after popping out of a jet stream tailwind? The result being that it actually entered orbit and was unable to re-enter so is adrift in space. Probably halfway to Mars with only a few left alive after canibalism took hold.
Why do you keep banging on about this tripe?I keep telling you...it's in Scun
M4cruiser said:
uncle tez said:
It might sound like a stupid question but has this been a very bad year for aviation in terms of accidents/incidents or is it just a case of a couple of high profile incidents that have brought more incidents into the eyes of the public through the media which we wouldn't normally hear about ?
If you include the recent Taiwan crash and the Air Algerie crash in the Sahara, added to the 2 Malaysian incidents .. then yes it does look like a bad year. I think the Sahara one we would have heard about anyway, so I wouldn't say the profile was raised by the media .. but today we're not hearing much from the Sahara.Last year only 265 people died in air crashes - by far the safest year of the modern era (and that was many smaller incidents, nothing large in terms of deaths). Excelllent CNN article: http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/07/travel/...
It is still possible that the radar and calculations are not correct it might have gone North and crashed into the Snow covered mountain range on impact causing an avalanche as such it is buried in the snow.
Maybe 50 years time the glacier will output it just like another plane back sometime after WW2 vanished then only recently appeared.
Maybe 50 years time the glacier will output it just like another plane back sometime after WW2 vanished then only recently appeared.
mybrainhurts said:
dvs_dave said:
I thought it had been agreed amongst the PH massive (the brainier ones at least) that it had reached a trans orbital velocity after popping out of a jet stream tailwind? The result being that it actually entered orbit and was unable to re-enter so is adrift in space. Probably halfway to Mars with only a few left alive after canibalism took hold.
Why do you keep banging on about this tripe?I keep telling you...it's in Scun
Welshbeef said:
It is still possible that the radar and calculations are not correct it might have gone North and crashed into the Snow covered mountain range on impact causing an avalanche as such it is buried in the snow.
Maybe 50 years time the glacier will output it just like another plane back sometime after WW2 vanished then only recently appeared.
China has quite a lot of military installations along it's Himalayan border... I would say it's possible but highly unlikely. Maybe 50 years time the glacier will output it just like another plane back sometime after WW2 vanished then only recently appeared.
skyrover said:
China has quite a lot of military installations along it's Himalayan border... I would say it's possible but highly unlikely.
That mountain range is vast and I'd say its much more probable thanLanding on the ocean then slowly sinking
Exceeding escape velocity to get into orbit
Landing on an island and is hidden
Welshbeef said:
That mountain range is vast and I'd say its much more probable than
Landing on the ocean then slowly sinking
Exceeding escape velocity to get into orbit
Landing on an island and is hidden
Landing on the Ocean and slowly sinking? You've been watching too much Castaway.Landing on the ocean then slowly sinking
Exceeding escape velocity to get into orbit
Landing on an island and is hidden
Hitting water from 30,000 feet would be like hitting concrete. Finding bits of plane bigger than a side plate would be the issue.
A plane hitting a mountain would leave a significant visible trace that I'd be amazed couldn't be found by satellite by now (assuming nobody saw it happen or came across it).
Of course, it might be on the moon awaiting refuelling by Willy Wonka on it's way to find some Vermicious Knids.
tenpenceshort said:
Landing on the Ocean and slowly sinking? You've been watching too much Castaway.
Hitting water from 30,000 feet would be like hitting concrete. Finding bits of plane bigger than a side plate would be the issue.
A plane hitting a mountain would leave a significant visible trace that I'd be amazed couldn't be found by satellite by now (assuming nobody saw it happen or came across it).
Of course, it might be on the moon awaiting refuelling by Willy Wonka on it's way to find some Vermicious Knids.
That plane from the 1950's hit a mountain and instantly caused an avalanche so it hid all evidence of any incident. It came out of the glacier 50 odd years later. Hitting water from 30,000 feet would be like hitting concrete. Finding bits of plane bigger than a side plate would be the issue.
A plane hitting a mountain would leave a significant visible trace that I'd be amazed couldn't be found by satellite by now (assuming nobody saw it happen or came across it).
Of course, it might be on the moon awaiting refuelling by Willy Wonka on it's way to find some Vermicious Knids.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff