Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
Seventy said:
Why wouldn’t he?
Do you have to know an area ‘well’ to crash a plane?
no, but you have to know how to bring the plane to SIO unnoticed, which is something you need lot of experience for, copilot just started flying and he was from a rich family, not really a situation where one would like to kill himselfDo you have to know an area ‘well’ to crash a plane?
This whole situation seems like a perfect example of experts stroking themselves to keep their expert willy waving display going when they don't have anything solid or even slightly soggy to go on.
They can't find the plane, they can't sift through pieces of wreckage to work out why it crashed so they make huge speculative leaps.
They can't find the plane, they can't sift through pieces of wreckage to work out why it crashed so they make huge speculative leaps.
NickXX said:
Would the range of a 777 increase significantly if you shut down one engine and ran the other at a speed which just enabled you to glide, or would the single engine have to massively over-compensate?
I expect the range would reduce? As it'll be trying to fly sideways and drag would increase a lot?A pilot will be along shortly to call me a fool....
frisbee said:
They can't find the plane, they can't sift through pieces of wreckage to work out why it crashed so they make huge speculative leaps.
Not that huge, if you go through all the feasible mechanical/electrical causes of a crash, it all becomes very obvious that to completely disappear, after turning and flying across the Indian Ocean, it almost certainly has to be deliberate. The chances of all the events occurring otherwise are similar to monkeys coming up with a Shakespeare play.frisbee said:
This whole situation seems like a perfect example of experts stroking themselves to keep their expert willy waving display going when they don't have anything solid or even slightly soggy to go on.
They can't find the plane, they can't sift through pieces of wreckage to work out why it crashed so they make huge speculative leaps.
This is spot on. With no wreckage or crash site experts can only offer educated guesses.They can't find the plane, they can't sift through pieces of wreckage to work out why it crashed so they make huge speculative leaps.
My (non educated) guess is that the plane had a pressurisation issue and the captain turned the transponder off and sent the plane off course in a Hypoxia induced state of confusion.
AreOut said:
young copilot wouldn't have enough knowledge to do this, captain was the only person on the plane who knew that area quite well
The First Officer is not a 'rookie' undergoing training. They are more than capable of flying the aircraft on their own and some have more hours than the Captain if they have joined from another airline.99dndd said:
My (non educated) guess is that the plane had a pressurisation issue and the captain turned the transponder off and sent the plane off course in a Hypoxia induced state of confusion.
Which would mean multiple system failures, as well as completely separate failures of multiple pilot oxygen bottles in the cockpit.KTF said:
The First Officer is not a 'rookie' undergoing training. They are more than capable of flying the aircraft on their own and some have more hours than the Captain if they have joined from another airline.
but it was one of his first "official" flights, it's one thing flying the aircraft on your own (which you can do after couple of months of training) and completely another bringing it few thousand miles from original destination unnoticedAreOut said:
it would have to fly at lower altitude where air becomes a bit more dense thus fuel efficiency decreases
So if you shut one engine down and had to fly lower in denser air, do you think you’d be using more or less fuel than on two engines flying higher up in thinner air? What would the effect be on the range with this decreased fuel efficiency you’ve mentioned? AreOut said:
knowing what route to take with least traffic to be noticed and going along the malaysian thai border to not trigger military response?
You think you’d be noticed by other aircraft? So you’d need experience to find a route with less aircraft on it? Presumably flying along a border is just telling the aircraft to follow some waypoints?
Or do you think the copilot wouldn’t know that or wouldn’t think to do that in the first place?
El stovey said:
So if you shut one engine down and had to fly lower in denser air, do you think you’d be using more or less fuel than on two engines flying higher up in thinner air? What would the effect be on the range with this decreased fuel efficiency you’ve mentioned?
you would have to use more fuel regardless if you ran one or two engines at lower altitude, at higher altitude air is also cooler not just less dense which also helps efficiencyEl stovey said:
You think you’d be noticed by other aircraft? So you’d need experience to find a route with less aircraft on it?
Presumably flying along a border is just telling the aircraft to follow some waypoints?
Or do you think the copilot wouldn’t know that or wouldn’t think to do that in the first place?
well if he flew standard route there is always chance(albeit very low) someone would notice him, yes flying along a border might be a coincidence as a route between two waypoints but in this case there is strong doubt it's done for purposePresumably flying along a border is just telling the aircraft to follow some waypoints?
Or do you think the copilot wouldn’t know that or wouldn’t think to do that in the first place?
copilot wouldn't even dare thinking about this let alone try pulling it off
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff