Jump to content

Mh370

threegee

By threegee
in Chat Central

 Share

Recommended Posts

threegee

threegee

Posted
Posted

Anyone following the disappearance closely may find this rather interesting:

http://keithledgerwood.tumblr.com/post/79838944823/did-malaysian-airlines-370-disappear-using-sia68-sq68

 

It's the only theory I have heard that makes any sense. That's if you believe that the military in this area are even half competent.

 

Some really good planning capped off with a bit of luck that another 777 was in more or less exactly the right place at the right time.  Maybe this couldn't have been pulled-off before ADS-B?

 

Doesn't explain who and why of course, but if it's even half the truth we are sure going to find out!

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. -- Sherlock Holmes

 

If you accept the sudden decompression theory then why did the aircraft fly on to a designated waypoint by itself?  Accepted logic is that this would require eight or nine accurate keystrokes on the autopilot.  On top of this you are required to believe that the aircraft carried on on a straight course for full seven hours without anyone up there or down here noticing, and then somehow ended up in some "Bermuda Triangle" area lost to all surveillance.  All the navigation/airframe electronics work, but all the autonomous communications ones don't!  Both pilots don't get to their oxygen masks in time?  If the pilots did have time to enter navigation coordinates they'd enter them straight back to departure point or a nearer airfield, not to a navigation point in the middle of the ocean.  The odds add up to making the sudden decompression theory unlikely, and there's not much left to consider except a carefully crafted plan.

 

If it was a decompression and/or fire then there are some serious design flaws and unforeseen interactions in the 777's systems, and it's imperative that the truth be known at the earliest possible moment.

mercuryg

mercuryg

Posted
Posted

It didn't fly anywhere 'by itself', someone flew it. Why is anyone's guess; something, somewhere, went wrong and it crashed.

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well someone may not have "flown" it, but someone was around to enter the coordinates, and that must have been someone who knew what they were doing - those coordinates are precise regional aviation waypoints.  Which rules out the loss being due to sudden decompression. i.e. why didn't they key in a workable altitude too if there was a general oxygen shortage?  They didn't have time before they passed out too?  OK, so how come they apparently did this at least *twice*?!

 

post-2-0-30698000-1395308733_thumb.png

 

This map was "leaked" from the investigators. The chiefs avoided all direct questions about the waypoint flying, and did the usual politicos try to change the subject.  The explanation has to be a freak combination of factors, because no single explanation adds-up.

 

 

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

....

And this morning, possible plane debris in the Indian Ocean.

http://news.msn.com/world/possible-malaysian-plane-debris-spotted-in-indian-ocean-off-australia

 

Which a guy on the Beeb says is just the right size for an ISO Container! :)  I hope he's right because it would still hold out some hope for the relatives.  No one is going to survive in those temperatures and that swell.

mercuryg

mercuryg

Posted
Posted

"The explanation has to be a freak combination of factors, because no single explanation adds-up."

 

Couldn't agree more.

  • 2 weeks later...
threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If this is true then there was no in-flight emergency, and the cause is entirely human intervention:

 

http://www.nst.com.my/nation/general/font-color-red-missing-mh370-font-pilot-i-established-contact-with-plane-1.503464#ixzz2xAMFgdac

 

It's also curious that in the final transmission to Malaysian Area Radar the frequency of Ho Chi Minh wasn't read back. This had been done religiously on each earlier hand-off.  It's almost as if there was already no intention to change to it, even more than ten minutes before this pilot says he established contact.
 

01:19:24 ATC: Malaysian Three Seven Zero contact Ho Chi Minh 120 decimal 9 Good Night
01:19:29 MAS370: Good Night Malaysian Three Seven Zero

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This report from the Aussies is a lot more believable than the Chinese leads:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10748957/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-authorities-very-close-to-finding-missing-plane.html

 

The duration of the sounds and the likely gear being used lend it a lot more weight. Chances are now better than evens that the batteries will last long enough despite the low temperatures, but it will be a close run thing.  Even so if this is not a false positive it will still have vastly narrowed the area of search, so that full recovery should be a matter of weeks and months, rather than years like the Air France plane.

 

That deep the search effective search radius is shrunk even further. So, despite the excellent work a fair element of luck in this Aussie detection I think.  Let's hope that luck holds!

  • 3 weeks later...
threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

All the fake psychics and conspiracy theorists are crawling out of the woodwork now, but that doesn't mean there isn't one!  Knowing a tiny bit about Carlyle and Freescale there's certainly mileage in this particular one.

 

You could go on to speculate that if you wanted to bury this one for good you'd arrange the searching to go on in the Southern Atlantic, and send a few misleading sonar signals to reinforce the belief that the aircraft must be there somewhere.  That might seem crazy to most mortals, but anyone who has any inkling of the vast resources that Carlyle commands wouldn't have any difficulty believing that. How this company has accumulated so much wealth in so short a period beggars belief. That they have all the "connections" can not be in doubt.

 

It surprised me that the Aussies were able to zero in on such a relatively small area so quickly on such tenuous data.  This having happened, and the signature being so unique, then why all the subsequent confusion?  Normally the sonar can take you there quickly and with reasonable precision.

  • 4 weeks later...
threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Interesting development:  Inmarsat recently released 47 pages of raw data to a group of satellite experts.  One of them, a Michael Exner, has just said that they've have asked for more background information, and indicated that on what they've seen so far there's no certainty that the original conclusion that the aircraft went South is correct!

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Michael Dean, the US Navy's deputy director of ocean engineering, told CNN that authorities now almost universally believe the pings did not come from the data or cockpit voice recorders.

If the pings had come from the recorders, searchers would have found them, he added.

Asked if other countries involved in the search had reached the same conclusion, Mr Dean said "yes".

"Our best theory at this point is that (the pings were) likely some sound produced by the ship ... or within the electronics of the Towed Pinger Locator," he went on.

....

He added that it was not possible to absolutely exclude that the pings came from the black boxes, but there is no evidence now to suggest they did.

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The New York Times reporting possible recorded acoustics off the southern tip of India - a long long way from the previous search zone.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-indian-ocean-recorded-noise-offers-clues-to-missing-plane.html?_r=0

 

UPDATE:

This news story could add weight to the above: http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/I-thought-saw-MH370-fire-says-Phuket/29654#ad-image-2

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes, but lazy journalism.  Nothing done to join the dots in order to add further information.  Nothing done to provide others with the information to do that for themselves.  They've filtered out the essential facts!  I've never rated the Indy, and this does nothing to change my mind.

keith lockey

keith lockey

Posted
Posted

Now if I had my conspiracy head on I would think the journalist might heve been deliberately hampered in the investigations in some way. But you're right about minimalistic journalism. I'm hoping they are going to follow it up with more details. I just thought it was interesting. Funny enough, in the 80s I thought the Independent was the only decent paper around.

threegee

threegee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Having given it a second look-over it's actually an article about a guy losing his job as a consequence of reporting whatever.  That's their get out clause for not reporting properly on whatever (=MH370).

 

I think that there's a term for articles which get your attention by feeding on interest on one thing, but in fact are about something completely different - a sort of parasitic journalism.  If there isn't then there certainly should be!  :)

  • 2 weeks later...

Create a free account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...