Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 598

Thread: Missing Malaysian Airlines B777

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    258
    Quote Originally Posted by starikki View Post
    Just guessing:
    What if the aircraft turned around without com/transponder due to system failure or hijack, and the Malaysian shot them down because there was no responce?
    And now they are just trying hard to cover up?
    The details that are now filtering through (i.e. plane changed course) must have been available from the start... So it is clear that there is a cover-up.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    I think that's a rather sweeping statement! There is still a great deal of confusion about what was known and about what is officially known. We are bombarded with "facts" from multiple sources, most probably unreliable, so it is unclear, yet, to know the actual facts of what happened up to the point when nothing is known.
    Charlie

    Keep smiling - it's never as bad as you think!!

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt-100 View Post
    If the phones have survived then that would suggest the aircraft came down over land (otherwise the water damage would have killed them, and besides I doubt they'd have signal over water). However I find it improbable it's come down over land, so I'd probably question the sources.

    I certainly don't believe that would be the case starikki, any shoot down would have to come from the Malaysian prime minister himself, and given the aircraft wasn't flying to any specific target (eg Kuala Lumpur) at the time it's unlikely. I heard here in the UK, priministerial protocol suggests a known hijacked aircraft needs to come within 30 seconds of central London before the go ahead is given. It really is a last resort.

    The Telegraph is reporting that Boeing sent out an airworthiness directive to all 772 operators in November to look out for fatigue cracks (after a 16 inch crack was found in one aircraft) under the SATCOM antenna in the fuselage. The directive went onto say that these fatigue cracks could result in sudden decompression or mid-air "break up".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...weak-spot.html
    From the telegraph article:
    "We received a report of cracking and corrosion in the fuselage skin underneath the SATCOM antenna adapter," the FAA warned. "During a maintenance planning data inspection, one operator reported a 16-inch crack under the 3-bay SATCOM antenna adapter plate in the crown skin of the fuselage on an aeroplane that was 14 years old with approximately 14,000 total flight cycles.
    Corrosion + cracking is not good at all in a dynamic environment. The reported 16in crack seems also really huge and sounds alarming.

    Do we have a link toward that FAA report?

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    568
    What we do have to consider though is the airframe with the corrosion and cracking had 14,000 cycles compared to the Malaysian's 3,500 cycles I believe it was (something around that figure)? Also the Malaysian aircraft had maintenance on 23 February, you'd think something would have been picked up then?

    Interestingly a group of fisherman have reportedly picked up what they believe was a deflated emergency slide 10 miles from Port Dickinson (sw Malaysia). Whilst transferring it to a Malaysian Maritime Authority ship it sank below the water (talk about incompetence).
    However a picture was taken of the 'thing' before it sank, can someone in the know confirm or deny it's from an aircraft? It has some distinguishing features on it such as the word "BOARDING" in bold red letters on the side.
    http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-co...ar-pd-1.509222

    Is there a possibility that the aircraft made a perfect ditching but the crew and passengers were unable to open the emergency exits and thus it sank below the water without a trace? Or maybe it simply filled up with water quicker than was designed and sank before crew and passengers had a chance to evacuate?
    Feel free to check out my aviation pictures at http://www.flickr.com/photos/lhr_spotter/ - comments welcome

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    Something here:

    http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf/0/d91639a24674ca8f86257c920050edf7/$FILE/2014-05-03.pdf
    Charlie

    Keep smiling - it's never as bad as you think!!

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    88
    That sounds a lot like the Comet scenario of a sudden, catastrophic failure of the fuselage, its surprising to think that something like that could still happen 60 years later. Meanwhile the Malaysians are now denying that they tracked the plane heading west, they aren't coming out if this very well are they?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    129
    Matt-100.. Melbourne Herald-Sun today reported the first officer recently having invited two attractive young ladies from the passenger queue, to join them on the flight deck for the TOTAL duration of that flight, including Take off and Landing.. photos include them posing for photos, and the girls wearing the Captains Cap etc.. Seriously NOT looking good for Malaysian.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    Indeed - that story widely reported here yesterday.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    258
    Quote Originally Posted by charliehunt View Post
    I think that's a rather sweeping statement! There is still a great deal of confusion about what was known and about what is officially known. We are bombarded with "facts" from multiple sources, most probably unreliable, so it is unclear, yet, to know the actual facts of what happened up to the point when nothing is known.
    True, however the reason why all these unreliable sources get to publish their "facts" and create confusion is precisely because of the lack of official information. It could simply due to sheer ignorance, or it could be because Malaysia chose not to release information. I tend to favour the latter.

    For example, this about the pair travelling with stolen passports (from the BBC)
    That's where I met Mohammad,.... He knew the two men who boarded flight MH370; he went to school with one of them, Pouria Nour Mohammad Mehrdad, and they both stayed the night with him before the flight. He helped print out their emailed tickets, and spotted the different names on them from the stolen Italian and Austrian passports. He then took them to the airport.
    ...
    Mohammad told the Malaysian authorities everything he knew early on Sunday. It took them three days to make that information public.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    I agree about apparent Malaysian reticence but that does still not excuse the publication of inaccurate and confusing "facts". I notice a senior pilot suggesting sudden and rapid depressurisation with the pilots unable to communicate before losing consciousness with the aircraft on autopilot eventually running out of fuel somewhere a very long way from where the searches are taking place.
    Charlie

    Keep smiling - it's never as bad as you think!!

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    8,866
    Quote Originally Posted by charliehunt View Post
    ... the aircraft on autopilot eventually running out of fuel somewhere a very long way from where the searches are taking place.
    But the autopilot would not have changed the aircraft's course which is what the authorities are saying now.
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    Sorry - I omitted a key part of his proposition - the pilot(s) altered course in the hope of returning to KL, engaged autopilot, before being rendered unconscious. It does not explain the lack of a mayday or other emergency signal, though.
    Charlie

    Keep smiling - it's never as bad as you think!!

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    484
    It's astonishing in this day and age when we simply lose all trace of an airliner. The aircraft has a satcom antenna, and yet we're still relying on having to find the flight data recorder and inconsistent radar data being analysed retrospectively. How difficult would it be for all airliners to simply relay their GPS coordinates, say every minute or less, via satcom to an on shore location? If we can operate UAVs using real time data streaming from half way around the globe, we should never really be in a position that we lose every single trace of an airliner.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    568
    But if you've got a decompression, surely the first thing you reach for is your oxygen mask in your side panel - not the heading select knob? Although it is a scary prospect to think if it was flying on auto it could be practically anywhere in the area, it would never be found.

    If it did fly over Pulau Perak it must have flown back over the peninsular, but primary radar didn't show any such reflection - it's extremely odd that an aircraft can fly over Malaysia without any radar trace. I didn't think Boeing had incorporated stealth mode into their commercial airliners? And if it did show up at Pulau Perak the transponder/secondary radar must have been turned back on again otherwise how do they even know it was MAS370 they saw? I'm beginning to believe the aircraft went down near to it's last civil recorded position at 01:30 as it was being handed over to Vietnamese controllers, anything else and you're verging on the science fiction outside of the whelm of logic. My advise to the SAR team... search harder in the area between Malaysia and Vietnam.
    Last edited by Matt-100; 12th March 2014 at 12:28.
    Feel free to check out my aviation pictures at http://www.flickr.com/photos/lhr_spotter/ - comments welcome

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    Did I read the Malay military have now denied earlier reports? The last recorded communication was apparently " Thank you - good night" at the handover from Malay to Vietnamese airspace.

    The worry is that almost anything is possible but much is improbable.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    South
    Posts
    50
    The link posted earlier looks like a life raft to me and one that's not been in the water very long.
    Impossible to tell what type or if it's from an aircraft or a ship.

    http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-co...ar-pd-1.509222

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    San Francisco, USA
    Posts
    845
    This is the only missing airplane case where everyday that pass by, we seem to known less about what happened. At this rate maybe tomorrow they will say Flight 370 never took off.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South East Essex
    Posts
    4,619
    Perhaps this incident will lead to a re-think of how automatic radio beacons could be used in aircraft.
    Which will survive violent impact, and act as a homing buoy. If say three were fitted to each aircraft,
    at least one should survive ?
    Engine Failure:.... A condition which occurs when all fuel tanks mysteriously become filled with air.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,448
    Quote Originally Posted by charliehunt View Post
    Something here:

    http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf/0/d91639a24674ca8f86257c920050edf7/$FILE/2014-05-03.pdf
    Thank you.


    ACARS Data confirmed being received by RR

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Fife, Scotland
    Posts
    11,220
    This is a most perplexing case.

    There is so much information and disinformation being fired out by the media, it is impossible to know what to believe.

    On every single aviation forum, I see countless posts of people saying this is likely a repeat of the Helios ghost flight. This theory has one serious flaw: It does not explain the lack of transponder data, ACARS or Radar return.
    I think we can rule that scenario out immediately. Besides, the 777 is far more sophisticated than the 737, it's pressurisation systems just would not let the pilots think it is all OK while gently sending them off into a hypoxic coma.
    Also, if there was a de pressurisation event, the pilots would don their masks. There are no ifs and buts. The second a de pressurisation is suspected, even a first year pilot cadet knows to put their mask on! Even if they were nitwits, it STILL doesn't explain the total lack of data from the aircraft.

    Either the transponder and communications systems were intentionally turned off, or something quick and catastrophic happened.

    I do not see how this can be an in flight break up either. That would leave a humongous and extremely hard to miss debris field. We're talking tens of square miles here.
    Besides which, this 777 apparently did not have the antenna in question in the AD. So I think that is a moot point.


    The possibility of a shoot down does exist.
    As does a hijacking by one of the flight crew (it's been done before, so is a valid possibility!)

    Most perplexing!
    Bmused55

    Keep thy airspeed up, less the earth come from below and smite thee.

    My Blog
    My Designs

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Luton, Beds.
    Posts
    338
    The media can't even agree on the final transmission. According to BBC News it was "All right, roger that", but according to Sky News it was "Okay, goodnight". Not hugely significant in itself, but it does make you wonder how accurate any of the information we're being given is, once it's been mangled by the media. If they can't even get a short quote right, what chance have they got with technical aviation details that they probably don't understand.

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    796
    Ok, heres another thought - contemplated today in the workshop.

    Evidentally not all the information is coming out public, pretty obvious, only causes more problems for the families, but it is all sounding a little bit strange. Searching areas 100 degrees off course, flying over land potentially undetected from gorund radar, also a very sudden declaration and focus on two people flying on stolen passports to detract attention away. Boats and planes all searched the last reported area, then again hundreds of miles to the west, and one supposed sighting by an oil worker hundreds of miles to the north east - dismissed as being a possible satelite burn up (todays radio 2 comment) and that the name given of the oil worker doesnt match employment records so can't be true - afterall thats hundreds of miles to the north east why would it be there????

    What was in the hold? Anybody know?

    Just throwing this one out there for discussion - whose to say there wasn't something being carried on board that shouldnt? We know it happens, we know stuff gets moved around in very strange ways, but what if something was being transported that could have been very useful to some country or organisation and details were leaked to those with an interest in such things?

    It would explain why the military have back tracked on what they say they have and havent tracked, would explain the sudden story of potential terrorist involvement from two gents with stolen passports, send everyone looking for the aircraft out to the west, making the assumption it crossed land without being detected - would be a great distraction to hide the fact it was transporting something nasty...

    Oil rig worker is way out to the north east, a diversion of say 20 - 30 degrees from track - kinda lines up with North Korea doesnt it? Seriously doubt the crew would have been carrying enough excess fuel for it to be capable of reaching North Korea instead of Beijing but the instant dismissal of a claim of a sighting to the north east, pushing the stolen passports and inconsistent military claims would in my mind lead to a good diversion away from this scenario.

    I dont claim to know anything about shipping, but surely there are many shipping lanes int he area they've been surveying, if it had gone west, it surely would have been found by now. My two pence if its worth anything is its on the ground, North Korea, having been hijacked by crew/passenger to take the contents of the hold to someone who wants whatever was in there. Malaysian cover up to hide what was going on, and delays whilst they work out how to explain where the pax are...

    just a thought...

    FB

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    484
    I think given the lack of any solid details from the Malaysians and frustration from any reasonable explanation, people are assuming wild conspiracy theories. But have to say, the Malaysian military have today come out and explained that the radar track they saw was an "unidentified flying object" and they "think" it "could" be the missing flight, but not 100% sure. Given all the information/misinformation, or rather lack thereof, I'm beginning to suspect we may never see any trace of this aircraft or anybody who was on board again, especially as time goes on.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    8,866
    The fact that there are no ELT signals leads me to question whether it made a soft landing somewhere.
    The ELTs, as I understand them, are independent of everything else. They can't be shut off by aircrew and lack of electrical power (something not to be expected given the 777s 10 generators) would not hamper their operation. If there was a hard landing, they'd go off...correct?

    I'd love to be a fly on the wall of Interpol or a national intelligence agency. I'd imagine someone has already suggesting checking out all the runways capable of handling the aircraft within a given range.
    Yes, it's a lont shot, but lacking any better theory, it's worth checking.
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    770
    Starting to remind me of "Thunderball".

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Londinium
    Posts
    244
    A number of people also thinking about the possibility of a shoot-down. But wouldn't a shoot down lead to a large debris field as well?
    As Theodore Roosevelt said:
    "Talk softly, but carry a big stick"

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    222
    not all shoot down leads to mid-air explosion.
    Last edited by Deano; 15th March 2014 at 12:17. Reason: COC RULE 14

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    8,866
    No, but hitting the water probably would create a debris field.
    Last edited by Deano; 15th March 2014 at 12:17. Reason: COC RULE 14
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,448
    Not much of AF447 was found. Crash attitude after a shot down would have been comparable (low frwd speed, nose up or down).

    @Fournier: interesting scenario

    That's were a platform like the SR71 wld hve helped
    Last edited by Deano; 15th March 2014 at 12:17. Reason: COC RULE 14

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Within striking distance of EGMH - as was!
    Posts
    11,477
    This morning:

    "The Wall Street Journal has reported that US investigators suspect the plane flew on for four hours once it lost contact with air traffic controllers, based on data from the plane’s engines that are automatically downloaded and transmitted to the ground as part of routine maintenance programmes."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES