Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
You lot and your quasi physics (London Bus indeed 
) with no real plausible counters to the theories I'm proposing. Next someone will seriously suggest that it ditched in the ocean without breaking up and sunk below the waves to a point of neutral buoyancy like a submarine and it's still floating around out there below the waves with all onboard slowly suffocating. Now that is a ridiculous theory!
) with no real plausible counters to the theories I'm proposing. Next someone will seriously suggest that it ditched in the ocean without breaking up and sunk below the waves to a point of neutral buoyancy like a submarine and it's still floating around out there below the waves with all onboard slowly suffocating. Now that is a ridiculous theory!dvs_dave said:
it ditched in the ocean without breaking up and sunk below the waves to a point of neutral buoyancy like a submarine and it's still floating around out there below the waves with all onboard slowly suffocating.
And then probably ended up here: http://beforeitsnews.com/paranormal/2014/05/massiv...
... Expert opinion never sounded so plausible did it ?AdeTuono said:
so called said:
There is actual documented evidence of just such an orbital mishap.
In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
And a London bus.....In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
The London bus was found at the South Pole, silly.
The paper reported months later that the plane had 'been stolen' from its moon crash site..
dvs_dave said:
Is it not possible that in conjunction with a high speed jet stream tail wind it got itself into a transitional orbit velocity, and then inadvertantly managed to slingshot around the earth sufficient for its speed to increase to full escape velocity? Given the altitude it would have ended up at, any aerodynamic control would have been ineffective due to the air being so thin, so the pilot wouldn't have been able to point the nose down and descend like he was perhaps used to.
I would certainly be interested in any evidence to categorically debunk this notion.
This is what it takes to make something that can escape Earth's gravity.I would certainly be interested in any evidence to categorically debunk this notion.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-cv_JJOxGI
This is what it would take to get a 777 into space.It's just that it would be going a lot further than the moon.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BiAVyMDWT4
c7xlg said:
so called said:
There is actual documented evidence of just such an orbital mishap.
In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
So Called,In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
Don't be such an idiot. That is impossible!!!
Everyone knows it was a B-17 they found not a B-52!!
so called said:
c7xlg said:
so called said:
There is actual documented evidence of just such an orbital mishap.
In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
So Called,In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
Don't be such an idiot. That is impossible!!!
Everyone knows it was a B-17 they found not a B-52!!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/62440303@N04/5683785...evenflow said:
So Inmarsat are now saying that they haven't searched in the area they said it was?!
Yes, that's what I heard, they've yet to search in what Inmarsat call the "hotspot". Why didn't they start looking there first? Or is this a new hotspot based on further refined data analysis?Tonight's program could be interesting, although I suspect a lot of it will be based on what's long been discussed on PPRUNE.
The Stiglet said:
so called said:
c7xlg said:
so called said:
There is actual documented evidence of just such an orbital mishap.
In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
So Called,In an early edition, the Daily or Sunday Sport reported, with photographic proof, on their front page, the discovery of a missing B52 Flying Fortress that had crash landed on the moon.
Don't be such an idiot. That is impossible!!!
Everyone knows it was a B-17 they found not a B-52!!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/62440303@N04/5683785...Documentary evidence that dvsdave could be on to something.
Actuslly I remember pages 2, 3, 4, 6, 9..........
GSE said:
Yes, that's what I heard, they've yet to search in what Inmarsat call the "hotspot". Why didn't they start looking there first? Or is this a new hotspot based on further refined data analysis?
Tonight's program could be interesting, although I suspect a lot of it will be based on what's long been discussed on PPRUNE.
Unless Horizon know something that noone else does (doubtful) then it will be the same old crap regurgitated one more time.Tonight's program could be interesting, although I suspect a lot of it will be based on what's long been discussed on PPRUNE.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff