Discussion
ridds said:
The whole simulating the glidepath on his Sim closed it for me.
Horrific what he did, imagine being caught up in his bats
t way out of life. 
If the programme is accurate, then there were just too many unlikely coincidences for it to be anything but murder/suicide.Horrific what he did, imagine being caught up in his bats
t way out of life. Interesting how they are convinced it was the Captain who did it, surely the first officer was equally of capable of doing it and nobody can know for sure, but the first officer seems to have been completley exhonerated?
sherman said:
At some point in that 250 miles. The pilot probably pointed the nose hard down or turned 90 degrees for no great reason exponentional increasing the area to be searched.
Look how long it took them to find the titanic and they had a vaugue idea of where itcwent down.
The reason the titanic went unfound for so long was simply that the tech wasn't up to the search for the first 80 years or so.Look how long it took them to find the titanic and they had a vaugue idea of where itcwent down.
The search that eventually found it actually found it very quickly and was act cover story for looking for something else, IIRC.
youngsyr said:
ridds said:
The whole simulating the glidepath on his Sim closed it for me.
Horrific what he did, imagine being caught up in his batst way out of life.
If the programme is accurate, then there were just too many unlikely coincidences for it to be anything but murder/suicide.Horrific what he did, imagine being caught up in his bats
t way out of life. Interesting how they are convinced it was the Captain who did it, surely the first officer was equally of capable of doing it and nobody can know for sure, but the first officer seems to have been completley exhonerated?
Trevatanus said:
youngsyr said:
The search that eventually found it actually found it very quickly and was act cover story for looking for something else, IIRC.
Can you expand on that please?MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
DaveTheRave87 said:
Trevatanus said:
youngsyr said:
The search that eventually found it actually found it very quickly and was act cover story for looking for something else, IIRC.
Can you expand on that please?MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
youngsyr said:
And from memory they found the Titanic very early on in their search window.
Eight days from the time they started actively searching for it - Ballard had 12 days left from the 60 days funded by the US Navy for his 1985 surveying season, the primary purpose of which was to survey and photograph the wreck of the USS Scorpion - this had been completed ahead of the (generous) schedule. Ballard had already surveyed a lot of the search ground in 1984 when using the same equipment (the ANGUS and Argo camera sleds and the Jason ROV) to locate the wrecks of Scorpion and Thresher. He also had the benefit of several years of detailed mapping and magnetometry surveys of the area done in the early 1980s by Jack Grimm's expeditions in search of it.
To develop and operate Argo Ballard had partnered with IFREMER and some staff from that agency were on his ship. the Knorr during the 1985 search mission. They had to be kept entirely in the dark as to what the real purpose was, and Ballard had to concoct reasons for the IFREMER people to not be in the ops room when the work over the Scorpion was taking place. Once the USN's interests were served, Ballard was free to team up with IFREMER's survey ship, the Le Suroît for the search for the wreck of the Titanic.
There are rumours that part of the reason Ballard found the wreck so quickly was that it had actually been found (or, at least, a likely candidate noted) in the 1984 expedition and the 1985 discovery was more of a confirmation.
It is known in hindsight that the first Grimm expedition had passed a sonar sled virtually right over the wreck and the second had towed one within a couple of miles. Those expeditions were hampered by typically poor North Atlantic weather and sea conditions (which Ballard's 1985 expedition lucked out on) and untried and unfamiliar equipment - Ballard had the advantage of the cutting-edge Argo sled with development, testing and real-world experience backed by USN funds over several years.
There are also theories that the wreck had already been found by our own BODC - the RRS Discovery did oceanographic work in the area in 1980, including a dense knot of passes very close to the vicinity of both the reported sinking position and the actual wrecksite (on the released map the track lines virtually obliterate the wreck's known location). The log of the Discovery says this was to survey mud waves and seabed channels. The log also says that the ship's long-range sonar system was in constant use during these passes but the magnetometer was only used once, for a period of one hour.
There is the fact that the Observer was the first British paper to break the news of the discovery, with a story in their September 1st issue, when the wreck was only found on the Knorr at just before 1am (local time Grand Banks) that morning. Woods Hole did not publicly confirm the story until late September 2nd. The Observer was tipped off by a contact in the marine search/salvage business who had a long-standing interest in the Titanic and confirmed the story with a source in the MoD. So was the location of the wreck known or strongly suspected by others already, or at least the Royal Navy, which was thus able to confirm its discovery before the discoverers had actually announced it? And what about the rumours (only rumours, but fun ones) that the RN had a submarine shadowing Ballard's entire expedition that year?
There are also rumours (not fully substantiated) that the US Navy had found (although not fully confirmed) the wreck with its own sonar surveys in the early 1970s. Ballard later confirmed he had access to the detailed seafloor charts generated from these surveys during his work with the USN over the years.
I think it's very likely that Ballard had a lot more to go on than just the Titanic's CQD position and the lifeboat recovery co-ordinates.
DaveTheRave87 said:
The US Navy paid for a search for the wreckage of 2 US nuclear subs but allocated 12 days at the end of the expedition to search for the Titanic.
MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
If that were the case then it’d carry on in straight and level flight, unresponsive with all comms active, until it ran out of fuel and crashed. See Helios Airways flight 552 for a real world example of that. MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
It wouldn’t have been flown in a way that appears to be avoiding radar, all comms systems having been systematically turned off, and the captain having a flight sim at home with logs of the same flight pattern having been flown/practiced numerous times before. Those are not the actions of a hypoxic flight crew. They are very deliberate actions. Not random flailing and illogical ones that slow hypoxia may cause.
Based on what’s in the public domain, there are not any other theories that explain every aspect of it better than Captain murder/suicide. Occam’’s Razor, etc.
He clearly did it since the critical point of going out of communication occurred at the perfect time, then the plane turned back along the route described.
To me it seems all planes should have a permanently live transponder that can’t be shut down remotely. I also wonder if planes could have a method where the 2nd officer can enter the cockpit ie can’t be prevented by the man inside the cockpit.
To me it seems all planes should have a permanently live transponder that can’t be shut down remotely. I also wonder if planes could have a method where the 2nd officer can enter the cockpit ie can’t be prevented by the man inside the cockpit.
dvs_dave said:
DaveTheRave87 said:
The US Navy paid for a search for the wreckage of 2 US nuclear subs but allocated 12 days at the end of the expedition to search for the Titanic.
MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
If that were the case then it’d carry on in straight and level flight, unresponsive with all comms active, until it ran out of fuel and crashed. See Helios Airways flight 552 for a real world example of that. MH370 is the sort of mystery that shouldn't be possible in the 21st century. I think the murder/suicide theory has too many holes, not least the fact that anyone doing this sort of thing would make it quick, like the Germanwings or Egypt Air flights.
For my money; the plane's slowly depressurised, the flight crew have become hypoxic and sent the plane off course with all the systems off as a result of their condition.
It wouldn’t have been flown in a way that appears to be avoiding radar, all comms systems having been systematically turned off, and the captain having a flight sim at home with logs of the same flight pattern having been flown/practiced numerous times before. Those are not the actions of a hypoxic flight crew. They are very deliberate actions. Not random flailing and illogical ones that slow hypoxia may cause.
Based on what’s in the public domain, there are not any other theories that explain every aspect of it better than Captain murder/suicide. Occam’’s Razor, etc.
CoolHands said:
He clearly did it since the critical point of going out of communication occurred at the perfect time, then the plane turned back along the route described.
To me it seems all planes should have a permanently live transponder that can’t be shut down remotely. I also wonder if planes could have a method where the 2nd officer can enter the cockpit ie can’t be prevented by the man inside the cockpit.
(I think you mean first officer not second officer) but - in another scenario a hijacker uses that method you're inventing that allows a person to enter the flight deck without the flight deck crew able to prevent it and everyone is up in arms that there is no override on the flight deck to prevent someone using that method. And round and round the circle goes. There is no perfect or foolproof solution. To me it seems all planes should have a permanently live transponder that can’t be shut down remotely. I also wonder if planes could have a method where the 2nd officer can enter the cockpit ie can’t be prevented by the man inside the cockpit.
Even a permanently live transponder doesn’t help you save any people or the aircraft. That’s ultimately what matters, and there seems to be enough pieces of information to know roughly where the aircraft went. A transponder is only useful in radar range, and knowing earlier that the aircraft was turning off course doesn’t help it get back on the ground safely.
Also, I don’t think there’s any download of that information to any ground station, so there’s no way of knowing without finding the recorders.
PERDU is a real waypoint by the way. It means “lost” in French.
CoolHands said:
We know where it ended up and we know it’s not where the flight computer would have taken it. It’s preposterous to think it wasn’t all done manually by one of two people.
An FMS goes wherever it’s programmed to go. If I’m at PERDU in France, with enough fuel to get to Biarritz, but I type in TOMBI (on the south coast of Türkiye), the plane is going to go towards there, even while it shows that it doesn’t have sufficient fuel to arrive.Also, I don’t think there’s any download of that information to any ground station, so there’s no way of knowing without finding the recorders.
PERDU is a real waypoint by the way. It means “lost” in French.
Edited by Prawo Jazdy on Sunday 17th December 20:43
MarkwG said:
Not necessarily, it depends what the flight computer was planned to do: the aircraft will fly the route it's programmed to until it runs out of fuel, not just straight & level. I don't think Occams Razor is much use, when we don't have accurate data, I'm certainly not comfortable trashing someone's reputation without conclusive proof.
Whether it was manually flown, or the flight path was programmed into the autopilot is irrelevant given the outcomes are the same. Both are deliberate actions that can’t have happened accidentally.What do you think happened that explains the circumstances equally as well, or better? A theory that doesn’t ignore the pilot’s home flight sim evidence which whilst not absolute proof, is nonetheless incredibly damning.
dvs_dave said:
MarkwG said:
Not necessarily, it depends what the flight computer was planned to do: the aircraft will fly the route it's programmed to until it runs out of fuel, not just straight & level. I don't think Occams Razor is much use, when we don't have accurate data, I'm certainly not comfortable trashing someone's reputation without conclusive proof.
Whether it was manually flown, or the flight path was programmed into the autopilot is irrelevant given the outcomes are the same. Both are deliberate actions that can’t have happened accidentally.What do you think happened that explains the circumstances equally as well, or better? A theory that doesn’t ignore the pilot’s home flight sim evidence which whilst not absolute proof, is nonetheless incredibly damning.
2xChevrons said:
<snip>
Ballard had already surveyed a lot of the search ground in 1984 when using the same equipment (the ANGUS and Argo camera sleds and the Jason ROV) to locate the wrecks of Scorpion and Thresher. He also had the benefit of several years of detailed mapping and magnetometry surveys of the area done in the early 1980s by Jack Grimm's expeditions in search of it.
Thanks to this rabbit hole, I am now an expert on Bayesian search theory, SubRoc and the Palomares B52 crash (both fascinating and very scary) Ballard had already surveyed a lot of the search ground in 1984 when using the same equipment (the ANGUS and Argo camera sleds and the Jason ROV) to locate the wrecks of Scorpion and Thresher. He also had the benefit of several years of detailed mapping and magnetometry surveys of the area done in the early 1980s by Jack Grimm's expeditions in search of it.
Great youtube documentary btw, thanks for the link.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff