Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"

[eccles]

jmorgan said:

More than anything I think the former, rather unfortunately, has shown what the media (including social media) is capable of.

With no disrespect to both these incidents, I wonder how they will rate on the innocents in Syria. Not meaning to detract from anything, it is an observation that keeps niggling me.

Where do you draw the line? With so much conflict around the world in Africa, the middle east etc Why single out Syria? There are hundreds of innocent people being killed daily and this airliner incident is at the top of the news because it affects people in this country and people can relate to it.

[jmorgan]

eccles said:

jmorgan said:

More than anything I think the former, rather unfortunately, has shown what the media (including social media) is capable of.

With no disrespect to both these incidents, I wonder how they will rate on the innocents in Syria. Not meaning to detract from anything, it is an observation that keeps niggling me.

Where do you draw the line? With so much conflict around the world in Africa, the middle east etc Why single out Syria? There are hundreds of innocent people being killed daily and this airliner incident is at the top of the news because it affects people in this country and people can relate to it.

It is an observation and not intended to detract from anything and certainly no disrespect meant to anyone.

Edit. That did not come out the right way. Apologise if it offended but it was not my intention.

[eccles]

jmorgan said:

eccles said:

jmorgan said:

More than anything I think the former, rather unfortunately, has shown what the media (including social media) is capable of.

With no disrespect to both these incidents, I wonder how they will rate on the innocents in Syria. Not meaning to detract from anything, it is an observation that keeps niggling me.

Where do you draw the line? With so much conflict around the world in Africa, the middle east etc Why single out Syria? There are hundreds of innocent people being killed daily and this airliner incident is at the top of the news because it affects people in this country and people can relate to it.

It is an observation and not intended to detract from anything and certainly no disrespect meant to anyone.

Edit. That did not come out the right way. Apologise if it offended but it was not my intention.

No offence taken.

[s3fella]

Seems like two relatives of people on mh370 were on mh17!

Flip me

[Megaflow]

A question about FDR & CVR's, sparked by MH17, but more relevant to MH370.

When they recover black boxes that have been under water, why to the keep them submerged in water upon recovery?

[Vaud]

Megaflow said:

why to the keep them submerged in water upon recovery?

Any chance of that in English?

[M4cruiser]

Steffan said:

I think the second tragedy has yet again confirmed what a danger the kind of fighting with modern weaponry can present to entirely innocent and unconnected targets. Whether these tragedies will result in fundamental changes to the collection and retention of data from the flights and a safer system for air traffic remains to be seen.

Agree, but I'd say that civil aviation has changed, or is changing, perhaps due to circumstances beyond its control, i.e. warfare / terrorism has changed, and we need to update the defences. You're right that MH370 may or may not be connected with terrorism, but whatever happened in either case a long-range tracker would help (and sorry if my earlier post about "gps" was unclear, but what I meant was a tracker like you can buy for your car, so that the dynamic location can be established remotely). I know it's been discussed a bit in earlier pages, and there are technical problems, but with technology you can never say "never". One day someone will make a reliable device that overcomes all the objections, and which would have allowed us to locate MH370 (the whole aircraft)and the MH17 (flight/data recorder).

[anonymous-user]

Vaud said:

Any chance of that in English?

When a black box is found in water, it gets stored in water until it can be investigated as this slows down corrosion, which occurs if it dries out.

[Megaflow]

el stovey said:

When a black box is found in water, it gets stored in water until it can be investigated as this slows down corrosion, which occurs if it dries out.

Ah, thank you. Blindling obvious when somebody says it

[Transmitter Man]

The SA-11 Buk that likely shot down #MH17 is now back in Russian:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0EF2_fJkA4

Phil

[Vaud]

Transmitter Man said:

The SA-11 Buk that likely shot down #MH17 is now back in Russian:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0EF2_fJkA4

Phil

I think you want this thread:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[Thankyou4calling]

Months passed and not a single piece of debris washed up or any real evidence of what happened. Astonishing stuff.

[onyx39]

Thankyou4calling said:

Months passed and not a single piece of debris washed up or any real evidence of what happened. Astonishing stuff.

That's because no-one has looked in the Hangar at Diego Garcia.

[Megaflow]

Thankyou4calling said:

Months passed and not a single piece of debris washed up or any real evidence of what happened. Astonishing stuff.

Very surprising, you'd have expected something to wash up somewhere. The longer it goes on the weirder it gets.

[B17NNS]

Megaflow said:

Very surprising, you'd have expected something to wash up somewhere. The longer it goes on the weirder it gets.

Media's got bored of it now too.

[Puggit]

Of course, if the plane is somewhere intact, then nothing will have washed up. Leading to 2 obvious potential directions. Either it landed somewhere and has been hidden, which is extremely difficult.

Or... Someone landed it at sea, intact, and sunk it slowly and deliberately. Presumably in a depth where it would sink without imploding and releasing floating material.

[anonymous-user]

Puggit said:

difficult.

Or... Someone landed it at sea, intact, and sunk it slowly and deliberately. Presumably in a depth where it would sink without imploding and releasing floating material.

For it to "sink" it would have to have both the cabin and the fuel tanks flooded! Unlike the film (that crappy one where the 747 sinks intact, Airport77 or some such) basic physics tells you it's really rather hard to sink a large sealled container full of air! ;-)

[KTF]

Max_Torque said:

For it to "sink" it would have to have both the cabin and the fuel tanks flooded! Unlike the film (that crappy one where the 747 sinks intact, Airport77 or some such) basic physics tells you it's really rather hard to sink a large sealled container full of air! ;-)

Its also unknown for them to land in the sea intact

[B17NNS]

Max_Torque said:

For it to "sink" it would have to have both the cabin and the fuel tanks flooded!

Planes are neither air nor watertight. Even a landing on water with no damage would result in a sinking.

[lamboman100]

KTF said:

Max_Torque said:

For it to "sink" it would have to have both the cabin and the fuel tanks flooded! Unlike the film (that crappy one where the 747 sinks intact, Airport77 or some such) basic physics tells you it's really rather hard to sink a large sealled container full of air! ;-)

Its also unknown for them to land in the sea intact

One famously landed intact on a big river, near the sea, a few years ago, of course.

It's unlikely, but not completely impossible.