Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH-370)

[Mechanic]

I don't mean to be rude but some of you seem to be ignoring or unaware that there are very credible indications that deliberate actions were affected (from within the plane) in regards to the aircraft's heading and altitude, systems like the ACARS and transponder, and of course that the aircraft continued to fly for several HOURS after the last 'contact'.

These aspects make many scenarios inconsistent or highly unlikely. Obviously, anything like a fire, being shot down, or catastrophic failure can most probably be ruled out.

With the disappearance of many aircraft in the past, including some of those listed above, it was reasonable to conclude what happened, the problem was having hard evidence to confirm the cause. So far what has happened in this case doesn't appear consistent with a hijacking, malicious action on behalf of an aircrew (like suicide), or a technical/procedural issue.

Equally obvious here is that if the flight recorders are not found we very well may never know what or the why that happened here; and a little frustrating acknowledgement is the possibility that finding the flight recording WON'T reveal a cause. Voice recorders are *recommended* to record at least two hours but are only required to record 30 minutes, so any relevant dialogue may be long gone, and flight data may show nothing more than fuel starvation and how the plane impacted the sea.

I hope the latest news plays out positive and they have indeed heard pings from one of the recorders.

[herky]

I for one dont think you are being rude.Everyone expert or layman is entitled to their theories or opinions on what has happened just as everyone has right to disagree on others opinions or theories.am interested to know your theory as reading your post you seem to rule out every known cause .

[CharlieC]

Long flights under only autopilot control aren't unknown. There was a Beechcraft crash in Australia in 2000 where the pilot and passengers were incapacitated by a pressurisation failure - the aircraft flew for 3000km before running out of fuel.

Hopefully the pings heard by the Chinese ship turn out to be the flight recorder. It won't be easy to retrieve the flight recorder though - it's a long way
(1800km) from Perth in very deep water.

Regards,

Charlie

[Mechanic]

Originally Posted by herky

I for one dont think you are being rude.Everyone expert or layman is entitled to their theories or opinions on what has happened just as everyone has right to disagree on others opinions or theories.am interested to know your theory as reading your post you seem to rule out every known cause .

I felt like I ought to put that out there, I tend to be a bit socially retarded and sometimes put things rather bluntly, and as my wife has pointed out repeatedly, people also don't always realize when I'm joking about something.

Anyway, as far as *my theory*, I don't think I really have one. I've already stated what I think is improbable, from the information I've seen I believe it was an intentional act. I don't think there was some kind of bizarre navigational mistake. But it's hard to say, bizarre mistakes happen. Air France 449 was a good example of how an aircrew could fly a (relatively) perfectly good aircraft into the water. And a good example of had it not been for finding the black box we NEVER would have found out why.

I think it's still most likely hijacking or action by the pilot and/or copilot, although as I said before, it doesn't seem to fit either of those, I do think they are the most probable. Regardless, I'm just really curious to see how it fits with what appear to be the present facts.

[herky]

the reason i go for the sudden event theory is partly down to human nature.over 200 people and no one has a cellphone.they managed it during the 9/11 events???

[POTKC]

I think it could have been a hijacking. Remember the Egyptair (was it Egyptair?) plane that was hijacked and the terrorists demanded to fly to Australia. The captain told them that there was not enough fuel but they insisted, so eventually the engines failed and the plane had to make a water landing. This could be something similar, except that it did not land in clear view of several hundred tourists, but crashed somewhere. Just my theory.

[herky]

Originally Posted by POTKC

I think it could have been a hijacking. Remember the Egyptair (was it Egyptair?) plane that was hijacked and the terrorists demanded to fly to Australia. The captain told them that there was not enough fuel but they insisted, so eventually the engines failed and the plane had to make a water landing. This could be something similar, except that it did not land in clear view of several hundred tourists, but crashed somewhere. Just my theory.

wasnt that the ethiopean airlines one that ditched of the beach

[herky]

ok so now the chinese navy are detecting pings as are the australian navy.trouble i they are 500kms apart.so they cant both be right unless you work on the theory that the tail broke apart and dropped the cvr and fdr 500 from each other.this just gets weirder however they could be pinging the british naval sub thats in the area also searching

[POTKC]

Yes, it was Ethiopian air that ditched. My mistake.

[CharlieC]

Originally Posted by herky

ok so now the chinese navy are detecting pings as are the australian navy.trouble i they are 500kms apart.so they cant both be right unless you work on the theory that the tail broke apart and dropped the cvr and fdr 500 from each other.this just gets weirder however they could be pinging the british naval sub thats in the area also searching

Not necessarily - the pings could be channelled by thermoclines. The Chinese only got a few seconds of data whereas the RAN ship got several minutes of pings today with a deep diving glider.

Regards,

Charlie