Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
AreOut said:
that's what ACARS is for
You constantly show that you google stuff and get a few acronyms and terms but don’t really understand any of it. Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
El stovey said:
AreOut said:
that's what ACARS is for
You constantly show that you google stuff and get a few acronyms and terms but don’t really understand any of it. Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
El stovey said:
You constantly show that you google stuff and get a few acronyms and terms but don’t really understand any of it.
Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
I knew about ACARS and I was very interested in aviation way before google even existed, I'm far from aviation expert and I don't claim to be one but I have read a lot more about it than average person. But even if I googled for it does it make my statement wrong?!Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
I don't present my "limited knowledge" or any knowledge as facts, I only present facts as facts.
I believe(due to known facts) it wasn't preplanned murder and PIC wanted to land somewhere but failed because it was everything but your standard "A to B" flight. I can't understand why people find it so unlikely since hijack failure rate is around 50% so nothing out of this world.
I would like to hear your theory why he went dark over Malaysia and around Sumatra towards Australia if he didn't want to land there.
AreOut said:
El stovey said:
You constantly show that you google stuff and get a few acronyms and terms but don’t really understand any of it.
Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
I knew about ACARS and I was very interested in aviation way before google even existed, I'm far from aviation expert and I don't claim to be one but I have read a lot more about it than average person. But even if I googled for it does it make my statement wrong?!Nothing wrong with that, but then you use this to make unlikely theories and present your limited knowledge as facts to back up these theories.
I don't present my "limited knowledge" or any knowledge as facts, I only present facts as facts.
I believe(due to known facts) it wasn't preplanned murder and PIC wanted to land somewhere but failed because it was everything but your standard "A to B" flight. I can't understand why people find it so unlikely since hijack failure rate is around 50% so nothing out of this world.
I would like to hear your theory why he went dark over Malaysia and around Sumatra towards Australia if he didn't want to land there.
People guessing about what happened is normal, what you do though is guess and then end with a statement like “it’s thhe only possible solution” or some other comments which shows you think you’re right. When in fact like most, if not all people here, you haven’t got a clue.
AreOut said:
The point was to make a statement. Pilot landing in Australia and requesting asylum after a regular flight wouldn't make news (except in local newspapers), pilot diverting a China bound flight, overflying Malaysia and going around Indonesia undetected landing surprisingly in Australia while all world media eyes are on the plane thinking it crashed in SCS would be entirely different.
There is no other plausible reason why anybody would do it like this.
There is no other plausible reason why anybody would do it like this.
AdeTuono said:
AreOut said:
..in case it was intentionally done by Captain (which it most probably was)
AreOut said:
AdeTuono said:
There are experts out there, with all the known facts. They have the pilot's background and psychological profile. They know the aircraft inside out. They have access to all the data that's available regarding the flight. They have information about tides and currents. There are organisations well versed in searching for debris underwater. They have access to historical data regarding similar episodes.
None of them have a clue what happened, as evidenced by the fact that they have yet to trace the missing flight. So, given that all I know is what has been released to the public, my opinion is that the flight is missing and more than likely we'll never know the fate of those on board.
You, however, with no more knowledge than the average man in the street, persist in positing ridiculous theories, and asserting that they are the only possible solution.
And you wonder why you're held to ridicule?
AreOut said:
I doubt plane electronics is connected to network/Internet. No reason to be.
That proves just how much you know about planes.Modern airliners are connected. Rolls Royce have live telemetry from their more recent engines sent back to their headquarters at Derby and a monitored 24/7 for problems. Sometimes they know if an engine is about to have a problem before the crew in the plane does.
AdeTuono said:
My opinion?
There are experts out there, with all the known facts. They have the pilot's background and psychological profile. They know the aircraft inside out. They have access to all the data that's available regarding the flight. They have information about tides and currents. There are organisations well versed in searching for debris underwater. They have access to historical data regarding similar episodes.
None of them have a clue what happened, as evidenced by the fact that they have yet to trace the missing flight. So, given that all I know is what has been released to the public, my opinion is that the flight is missing and more than likely we'll never know the fate of those on board.
You, however, with no more knowledge than the average man in the street, persist in positing ridiculous theories, and asserting that they are the only possible solution.
And you wonder why you're held to ridicule?
Malaysian government has good relations with Australia and all others (except their own people). So western governments are turning blind eye because they find malaysian government benefical and they don't want to rock that boat by announcing Captain as a main culprit because then they'd have to explain his motives and that wouldn't be good. Malaysia has jailed the opposition leader because he is (allegedly) a homosexual and western MSM is staying silent. If Putin did something like that CNN/NBC/BBC and others would scream day and night about it. It's called politics.There are experts out there, with all the known facts. They have the pilot's background and psychological profile. They know the aircraft inside out. They have access to all the data that's available regarding the flight. They have information about tides and currents. There are organisations well versed in searching for debris underwater. They have access to historical data regarding similar episodes.
None of them have a clue what happened, as evidenced by the fact that they have yet to trace the missing flight. So, given that all I know is what has been released to the public, my opinion is that the flight is missing and more than likely we'll never know the fate of those on board.
You, however, with no more knowledge than the average man in the street, persist in positing ridiculous theories, and asserting that they are the only possible solution.
And you wonder why you're held to ridicule?
Megaflow said:
That proves just how much you know about planes.
Modern airliners are connected. Rolls Royce have live telemetry from their more recent engines sent back to their headquarters at Derby and a monitored 24/7 for problems. Sometimes they know if an engine is about to have a problem before the crew in the plane does.
via Internet?! I know they are actively working on it but didn't know it's already introduced, got a link?Modern airliners are connected. Rolls Royce have live telemetry from their more recent engines sent back to their headquarters at Derby and a monitored 24/7 for problems. Sometimes they know if an engine is about to have a problem before the crew in the plane does.
AreOut said:
via Internet?! I know they are actively working on it but didn't know it's already introduced, got a link?
Here's the FT talking about it, ten years ago...https://www.ft.com/content/2b1d2e0c-3032-11dd-86cc...
AreOut said:
AdeTuono said:
My opinion?
There are experts out there, with all the known facts. They have the pilot's background and psychological profile. They know the aircraft inside out. They have access to all the data that's available regarding the flight. They have information about tides and currents. There are organisations well versed in searching for debris underwater. They have access to historical data regarding similar episodes.
None of them have a clue what happened, as evidenced by the fact that they have yet to trace the missing flight. So, given that all I know is what has been released to the public, my opinion is that the flight is missing and more than likely we'll never know the fate of those on board.
You, however, with no more knowledge than the average man in the street, persist in positing ridiculous theories, and asserting that they are the only possible solution.
And you wonder why you're held to ridicule?
Malaysian government has good relations with Australia and all others (except their own people). So western governments are turning blind eye because they find malaysian government benefical and they don't want to rock that boat by announcing Captain as a main culprit because then they'd have to explain his motives and that wouldn't be good. Malaysia has jailed the opposition leader because he is (allegedly) a homosexual and western MSM is staying silent. If Putin did something like that CNN/NBC/BBC and others would scream day and night about it. It's called politics.There are experts out there, with all the known facts. They have the pilot's background and psychological profile. They know the aircraft inside out. They have access to all the data that's available regarding the flight. They have information about tides and currents. There are organisations well versed in searching for debris underwater. They have access to historical data regarding similar episodes.
None of them have a clue what happened, as evidenced by the fact that they have yet to trace the missing flight. So, given that all I know is what has been released to the public, my opinion is that the flight is missing and more than likely we'll never know the fate of those on board.
You, however, with no more knowledge than the average man in the street, persist in positing ridiculous theories, and asserting that they are the only possible solution.
And you wonder why you're held to ridicule?
Fabric said:
Here's the FT talking about it, ten years ago...
https://www.ft.com/content/2b1d2e0c-3032-11dd-86cc...
I'm not a subscriber. Can you copy it?https://www.ft.com/content/2b1d2e0c-3032-11dd-86cc...
AdeTuono said:
Well, that explains everything. We can just wrap it up now, can't we? It's like the scales have fallen from my eyes.
Nope, we are just discussing possibilities here.AreOut said:
I'm not a subscriber. Can you copy it?
Neither am I actually, for some reason it works via Google - but not via here! Search "Rolls-Royce reaps the rewards of client care" for the article, or read the relevant quoted bit below;FT Article said:
At London Heathrow, a British Airways Boeing 777 prepares for take-off. The engines power on and the aircraft lifts off from the runway, on its way to a cruising altitude of 30,000ft, bound for New York.
Back on the ground in a small office in Derby in the East Midlands, the aircraft’s engines are being monitored in real time by an innovative IT system.
If at any time an engine’s performance falls outside strict parameters, for example if it starts vibrating too much, it will be picked up by the team of experts in the room who can respond instantly.
They can pull up the history of an engine – from when it first entered service to any problems it may have experienced in the past.
Back on the ground in a small office in Derby in the East Midlands, the aircraft’s engines are being monitored in real time by an innovative IT system.
If at any time an engine’s performance falls outside strict parameters, for example if it starts vibrating too much, it will be picked up by the team of experts in the room who can respond instantly.
They can pull up the history of an engine – from when it first entered service to any problems it may have experienced in the past.
AreOut said:
via Internet?! I know they are actively working on it but didn't know it's already introduced, got a link?
Engine data is sent (via satellite). It’s a one way system and the amount of data depends on the subscription taken by the airline (Malaysian Airlines had pretty basic information as a result).However, that system isn’t on a shared network and doesn’t go anywhere near the Internet.
It’s like trying to hack the BBC by receiving a Radio 1 transmission.
It’s been much discussed in relation to mh370, mainly to ascertain how long the engines ran for.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.forbes.com/site...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff