• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Flight MH370

BBC has this to say about that theory:

If the course was changed during a major emergency, one might expect it to be done using manual control. But the left turn was the result of someone in the ****pit typing "seven or eight keystrokes into a computer on a knee-high pedal stool between the captain and the first officer, according to officials", the New York Times reported. The paper says this "has reinforced the belief of investigators - first voiced by Malaysian officials - that the plane was deliberately diverted and that foul play was involved."
Click to expand...

I don't see why that discounts the pilot typing in the keystrokes?

Also a theory from the bbc website (#7) is that the jet hid in the 'radar shadow' of another airliner; BBC article

Also that article suggests the plane was taken high above it's 'ceiling' if there was a fire could that be a tactic to put it out? fires don't burn without enough oxygen.
 
Last edited:
7percent said:
BBC has this to say about that theory:



I don't see why that discounts the pilot typing in the keystrokes?

Also a theory from the bbc website (#7) is that the jet hid in the 'radar shadow' of another airliner; BBC article

Also that article suggests the plane was taken high above it's 'ceiling' if there was a fire could that be a tactic to put it out? fires don't burn without enough oxygen.
Click to expand...

Flying at that altitude might suffocate the passengers as well, and as was mentioned, oxygen masks are not an option. Was the plane taken up to around 45,000 feet?
 
7percent said:
BBC has this to say about that theory:



I don't see why that discounts the pilot typing in the keystrokes?
Click to expand...

I'm just speculating myself here as I don't know enough about the complexities of onboard systems. What if they are suggesting for example a laptop/external device was used hence the part about 'in between' the pilots. I am assuming they would know if it was an external device as using on board systems would log that it had been used.
 
markysimmo said:
Not at all, just feel that its being covered up currently due to whats happening behind the scene's, we'll know soon enough I expect
Click to expand...

bennysleftfoot said:
I agree, there's more going on behind-the-scenes than is being letting on. They def no more than they're drip feeding the media. Which in turn doesn't help, as the media then has to fill in the blanks, fuelling all the crackpot conspiracy theories
Click to expand...

nonsense. i keep hearing stuff like this yet people cant follow it up. why the hell would the ministers be withholding information?
 
Last edited:
DHSF said:
I dont think its crashed, that seems to be the general consensus as well, but where the **** is it? Cant be in some country as someone I mean SOMEONE would have seen it. An Island as you say Naja? then why couldnt the pilot just land it in a country anyways? How did the hijackers (assumingly so) get into the ****pit - arent they secure now?

I find it fascinating.
Click to expand...


really? unfortunately i feel it has crashed in the ocean somewhere... but where?
 
BBC saying ;

rspace.

The last transmission from the plane's Aircraft and Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) was received at 01:07.

"We don't know when the ACARS was switched off after that," Mr Ahmad Jauhari said. "It was supposed to transmit 30 minutes from there, but that transmission did not come through."

The plane disappeared from air traffic controllers' screens at 01:21, when it was over the South China Sea.



So if there was a fire as theorised in marky's post I can't help but think it would have been reported. Any incident woukd have been happening during the above times.
 
BjCa07GIMAE05ip.jpg
 
Spaceman said:
really? unfortunately i feel it has crashed in the ocean somewhere... but where?
Click to expand...

I dont know how planes work, in terms of signals etc, but if it crashed i.e. from a fire, would there not have been a signal anyways? and between the fire and the loss of signal, there would have been communication from the pilots - no? It seems that it was a flick of a switch that communication (ALL) was lost...
 
7percent said:
BBC has this to say about that theory:



I don't see why that discounts the pilot typing in the keystrokes?

Also a theory from the bbc website (#7) is that the jet hid in the 'radar shadow' of another airliner; BBC article

Also that article suggests the plane was taken high above it's 'ceiling' if there was a fire could that be a tactic to put it out? fires don't burn without enough oxygen.
Click to expand...

They couldn't climb to put out an internal fire, assuming the cabin was still pressurised.

They could conceivably climb to try and extinguish an external (engine) fire.
 
what I know about aviation could fit in a tweet , but is the Occam's razor solution not that it crashed into the sea and the later engine comms where when the broken off engine bobbed up to the surface?
 
DHSF said:
I dont know how planes work, in terms of signals etc, but if it crashed i.e. from a fire, would there not have been a signal anyways? and between the fire and the loss of signal, there would have been communication from the pilots - no? It seems that it was a flick of a switch that communication (ALL) was lost...
Click to expand...

The theory is that to try and extinguish/control an electrical fire they'd turn off certain circuits or busses and the beacons/communications would have been powered down.
 
galeforce said:
how long does it take to hail a mayday, surely thats step 1 in any disaster scenario?
Click to expand...

That's my thought too, and surely in a modern airliner there'd be a back up radio system on a different circuit/power source if the first one was made unusable?
 
you'd think it wouldn't even need to be a radio transmission, just a flick of a switch or the push of a button

on railway loco's they have a system where if the driver doesn't push the right button at the right time its assumed they are incapacitated (and on electrified routes the train is stopped automatically), i'd be amazed if the aviation industry didn't have an equivalent safety feature, obviously not one that just stopped it mind
 
bennysleftfoot said:
Evidence of a plot by Malaysian Islamists to hijack a passenger jet in a 9/11-style attack is being investigated in connection with the disappearance of Flight MH370.

An al-Qaeda supergrass told a court last week that four to five Malaysian men had been planning to take control of a plane, using a bomb hidden in a shoe to blow open the ****pit door.

Security experts said the evidence from a convicted British terrorist was “credible”. The supergrass said that he had met the Malaysian jihadists – one of whom was a pilot – in Afghanistan and given them a shoe bomb to use to take control of an aircraft.

Source
Click to expand...

That, I fear, is the reality.

For absolutely no message of distress to have come from the plane, (or at least, none admitted) from an automated system, crew or from any of the 239 passengers (mobiles/laptop/tablet, or whatever) is a huge pointer. The only way that no message could be got away (without a suppressing force of people) would be a huge and sudden explosion. But this would leave a lot of wreckage. A 777 is a big aircraft. To explode from any reasonable height would spray wreckage over a wide area, and much would float. Passenger baggage for starters. Plus a huge amount of aviation spirit and oil. This would have been discovered by now.

A terrorist group with a clear plan and objective, and destination is my bet. Maybe gas was used to knock out passengers quickly. Thus stopping any from getting away messages. Mobiles have really taken off, post 9/11. Some passengers will have had these on their person. Maybe crew were acting with others? Maybe the crew were overpowered. A quick all-round action would be the key to success. Land the plane at a predetermined airfield? Fly low under radar to get to it?

If this is true..... why? I hope to hell this is wrong, but. A 777 can pretty much fly half way round the world. Its been a long time since 9/11. Bin Laden has been killed. Revenge? A big hit? A lot of nastiness can be delivered by a flying delivery service 777, with a suicide pilot in control. This would also explain the complete silence after its disappearance.

Frighteningly, it is plausible. If it did happen, it would test out military pilots nerve in shooting down an airliner, if they got the chance. Quite a call to make.
 
Mobile phones only work in a certain range of phone masts.. They were over the sea when things started going wrong?
 
Not that long ago, the sheer idea of a group of airliners being hijacked simultaneously, and then being flown into capital buildings to create carnage, was disbelieved. There was one chance of doing that within the USA, before security and procedures would be massively beefed up. However, post 9/11, I am not sure the far east has had the same level of security improvement with aviation. Thus an obvious terrorist softer target. Plus a big airliner. It all fits.

Grab aircraft. Lie low for a while. No publicity. Then strike.

The key is the landing ground for the plane. Where? It turned back (flying 'with the night'?). Range 8,000 miles. There are lots of possibilities.
 
If this plane or it's remains is never found, this will grow to be the mother of all conspiracy theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back