[Closed] Missing Malaysian Aircraft - is it possible...

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned here, but one suggestion which seems to be taken as realistic on the pprune thread is that all the passengers could have been disabled through hypoxia (or possibly CO2 poisoning amongst other possibilities) quite early on. Hence it could have landed somewhere but full of dead people. Not that I think it's likely, but it certainly seems more plausible that it could have landed somewhere with the latest information about how long it flew for.

Daily Express headline today on front pg: Plane taken by Pirates.

I thought how do you get a Parrot through customs and hide your accent?

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned here, but one suggestion which seems to be taken as realistic on the pprune thread is that all the passengers could have been disabled through hypoxia (or possibly CO2 poisoning amongst other possibilities) quite early on. Hence it could have landed somewhere but full of dead people. Not that I think it's likely, but it certainly seems more plausible that it could have landed somewhere with the latest information about how long it flew for.

Wasn't that the start of Mission Impossible II, or III or IV?

Meanwhile vertical stabilizer is actually a far more specific term than tail (which would tend to include the horizontal stabilizers, part of the fuselage and typically the APU among other stuff). The photos posted are of the vertical stabilizer, not the tail. The tail isn't actually a type of vertical stabilizer at all - if that was the case, what other types of vertical stabilizer do you think there are?

Interesting how debates on here make you read up and learn stuff though - its not really a criticism to say hey you went and educated yourself on the subject though ...it may even be a straw man 😛

The latest educated opinion (i.e. pilots, not just people on the internet) seems to be that the aircraft flew a waypointed course, and that's something that could really only be done by someone certified to fly the aircraft - i.e. the pilot, basically.

Looking like it headed down over the south Indian Ocean, for who knows what reason.

I think it was Bane.

My opinion may be ignorant and uninformed but damnit, I am entitled to it!!oNE!

Now we know acars and the transponder were switched off, we've came to the conclusion that it couldn't have been hijacked (no hijack squawk) and that one of the pilots has went mental. He's offed the other pilot and tried to make his way to afghan for some good smack.

Well the smack bits a lie, but if the pilot is suicidal, the above scenario is plausible. Passengers wouldn't know a thing about it so no one would be trying to phone relatives etc.

I'm not sure you appreciate quite how vast and empty the open sea is. Maybe if they had some idea where it went down and had narrowed the search, but they don't.

True, however it's likely that if this happened then the much floating debris that would result, would now, after a week, have dispersed far and wide - so it's still strange that no one's seen anything, especially considering how much publicity this has had, and considering how heavily fished most waters are now.

You also have to ask the question, why would the hijackers crash land at sea where no one would know? The polar opposite of almost all other hijackings where publicity or some other demands were sought/made.

You have to remember that if the plane carried on flying for several hours then a) the people flying it were fully competent and trained, b) the plane was fully working without mechanical problem and c) there's no likely reason why it should have been crashed, either deliberately or as an accident.

Of course there's a chance I'm totally wrong. It's just my opinion from the evidence we seem to have.

Whatever the outcome I am sure it is related to terrorism. If the plane did not disintegrate mid air or dive into sea but flew towards Northern India or Central Asia then it's definitely in the hand of fanatics now planning their next move.

[quote=Junkyard ]Someone has been googling
Interesting how debates on here make you read up and learn stuff though - its not really a criticism to say hey you went and educated yourself on the subject though ...it may even be a straw man

Just for a change, no, it's a subject I happen to know a bit about - I have done some work with real aircraft (I think some of the kit I helped put together is still flying around) and also fly models. You do make a good point in general though.

So the plane, once it went missing, flew a way marked course and it appeared to have more fuel than necessary on board....

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost-199.html 3980

[quote=rebel12 ]True, however it's likely that if this happened then the much floating debris that would result, would now, after a week, have dispersed far and wide - so it's still strange that no one's seen anything, especially considering how much publicity this has had, and considering how heavily fished most waters are now.

Not necessarily that much floating debris - it took a while to find anything of AF447 and they had a much better idea where that went down. Meanwhile plenty of water out there which nobody goes near. One of the most plausible theories is also pilot suicide, and as I mentioned above the hijacking could have gone wrong. We're just guessing though - I'm sure we will find out more eventually. As I suggested a bit earlier it now seems clear that they knew a lot more than they have been telling us.

Even pilot suicide would be odd - to apparently load more fuel, then deliberately fly a course that avoids detection. Much easier to just fly into a mountain. Unless it's some weird fantasy thing.

I think the issue is that anything is odd given the available evidence.

considering how heavily fished most waters are now.

Once you get off the main shipping lanes the Indian Ocean is a pretty empty place. I worked on a survey boat out there once for about three weeks. I think we saw one other boat on the horizon and that was it. This is a plot of shipping density, some big holes...

[img] [/img]

I think the issue is that anything is odd given the available evidence.

Indeed.

and it appeared to have more fuel than necessary on board....

There are a variety of reasons for which they will often take more fuel than they strictly need, especially when flying over water.

Well not really. A lot of aviation stuff uses "americanisms" as standard. Meanwhile vertical stabilizer is actually a far more specific term than tail (which would tend to include the horizontal stabilizers, part of the fuselage and typically the APU among other stuff). The photos posted are of the vertical stabilizer, not the tail. The tail isn't actually a type of vertical stabilizer at all - if that was the case, what other types of vertical stabilizer do you think there are? A better analogy might be you posting a picture of a tyre and saying "here's a photo of my wheel".

One of my favourite books when I was younger was called Hijacked - about a plane that got hijacked and the hijackers forced the plane to land on a remote island - maybe someone has took this book to heart.

Also, its one thing landing it on a desert island or whatever and they may even have room to take back off again but how the **** would they fuel it.

Several thousands of gallons of kerosene takes up a fair amount of space and you can't exactly siphon it into the tanks...

You also have to ask the question, why would the hijackers crash land at sea where no one would know?

Hijacked, intended to crash into a populated place, pilot bins it in the ocean to limit fatalities?

All pretty awful. I'm probably like other people who thought this stuff just couldn't happen any more when everything seems tracked all the time.

[i]I thought how do you get a Parrot through customs and hide your accent?[/i]

I can just imagine it, 'Take me to Cubarrr!'

There is a precedent for hijackers hijacking a plane and flying it until it ran out of fuel, it's happened before, so it's not so implausible. Obviously flying the aircraft until it runs out of fuel may not have been their original intention. However post 9/11 I really don't think this would happen. The cockpit doors are armored and in the event of a hijack the pilots wouldn't open the door to the hijackers, they would raise the alarm and land the aircraft. Plus there would be plenty of opportunity for passengers to send text messages and make phone calls. Whatever happened happened without the passengers or cabin crew knowing. They obviously thought they were on their way to Beijing until the end.

I'm favoring the pilot suicide theory. It's the only way the aircraft would be turned around deliberately and flown for at least 4 more hours with no communication to ATC. No other theory makes sense, not even the asphyxiation theory (due to cabin pressurisation problem), because the pilot turned the aircraft around and if he did that because he suspected a malfunction then he would have radio'd it in and called an emergency.

[quote=wobbliscott ]There is a precedent for hijackers hijacking a plane and flying it until it ran out of fuel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

Plus there would be plenty of opportunity for passengers to send text messages and make phone calls

Really? Over the sea?

[url= http://www.grreporter.info/en/greek_tanker_has_detected_possible_traces_missing_flight_%CE%BC%CE%B7370/10858 ]Greek tanker spots suitcases [/url]

If they have engine data showing it flew on for hours how does the data end, eg does it stop abruptly or show signs of fuel loss or normal landing signs

If they have engine data showing it flew on for hours how does the data end, eg does it stop abruptly or show signs of fuel loss or normal landing signs

I heard (could be very wrong) that the engine data wasn't being saved, because the airline didn't pay for that option, but the engines still tried to contact home, but didn't actually transmit the data.

Did I make this up or did someone else hear it?

brant - Member
Greek tanker spots suitcases

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST

Links been hijacked 😉

brant - Member
Greek tanker spots suitcases

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO #

No. It didn't. It was warned to watch out for them.

[quote=richmars ]I heard (could be very wrong) that the engine data wasn't being saved, because the airline didn't pay for that option, but the engines still tried to contact home, but didn't actually transmit the data.

Not exactly, and not really anything to do with the engines or whether or not there was a contract. It's been described on pprune as "pinging" - what appears to have been happening is "keep alive" messages on the Inmarsat link, which keeps the system appraised of what satellites it is in contact with, so that it is ready for use when required - presumably normally voice comms given they don't seem to have used that link for telemetry.

Hence no data at all from the aircraft, no engine data, no speed, no altitude, not even position. What they do have if I understand correctly is a roundtrip message time which allows them to place the aircraft on a circle a certain distance from the satellite. This then results in the northerly and southerly location "corridors", with the ends of these corridors the range of the aircraft at the time of the last "ping". The reason for two separate corridors rather than a single arc is that part of the possible circle is within coverage of another Inmarsat satellite which didn't receive the "ping", hence this part is also removed from the possible locations.

[img] [/img]

^ it also stopped off somewhere and had a couple of additional engines fitted too! according the that picture.

Good spot; otherwise convincing.

I'm more interested in this Melissa and what she got up to on her hols.

I understand she went to Malaysia and got invited into the cockpit...

I'm more interested in this Melissa and what she got up to on her hols.

At this point I would usually post a link, but it's too sunny to get banned.

[quote=_tom_ said]I'm more interested in this Melissa and what she got up to on her hols.

Purchased some ill fitting garments by the looks of it.

She'll catch a chill.

ampthill - Member
Plus there would be plenty of opportunity for passengers to send text messages and make phone calls
Really? Over the sea?

yeah but it crossed back over malaysia

would the phones not have been talking to cell phone towers?

Im assuming the authorities have the phone details of the passengers?

even if everyone was dead from asphyxiation (unless their phones were confiscated by hijackers and turned off) if the plane was anywhere near land the phones would be traceable

Whoever was behind all this seems to have thought through lots of detail. So perhaps a GSM jammer was being used also.

I'd been thinking about this phone thing as well. Almost certain that someone on the plane would have at least tried to send a message. Probably something like

WR BNG HJKD. LOOOOOOOOOOOooooOOO1111L!

So, options to debunk that?
All passengers gassed/incapacitated/or even killed
All mobiles 'confiscated' by alleged hijackers
Aliens have the plane and their cloaking device also blocks phone signals

can you depressurise the passenger cabin and retain pressure in cockpit?

IIRC the cockpits usually have a chemical oxygen supply to ensure oxygen for the pilots even if every other system fails.

EDIT - wrong way round - passengers get chemical oxygen, the pilots get it from an oxygen cylinder.

Cabin air pressure is just supplied by a bleed off the engines (except on the dreamliner). Don't think the pilot's supply lasts very long: more than the 3 mins the overhead masks give you but not 4 or 5 hours. IIRc it's bottled air whereas the overhead mask as are a chemical generator. Enough time to get down to a safe altitude. Suppose you might be able drop the cabin temperature at the same time to stop people from waking up?

I am a bit rusty (been a while since I've been involved in designing a whole plane) but the pilots have a different oxygen supply to the passengers. The passenger air only lasts long enough to get the plane down to breathable air. The cabin crew have portable tanks so they can get around the cabin to help passengers and/or crew.

On thing to remember is the passengers should have had their mobiles turned off as they were on a plane. There may be a few who left them on silent.

edit: yes, passenger air is a chemical generator and I think pilots are tanks. It is possible to gradually drop the cabin pressure to make the passengers drift off without realising, or at very least by the time they do they are very disorientated and weakened they cannot do anything. You would need to avoid the masks dropping though but that should be possible by keeping the pressure just above the cut off for a long period. You may still need to drop it further but they may well be too weak or not conscious by then.

Cockpit air supply is around 10 - 15 minutes - enough time to drop to lower altitude basically.