So where is this plane?

If it did crash in water You would think the debris field would be huge .Possibly large enough to be seen from space
 
BobbyFord said:
Based on the information I've read, I believe the course of the aircraft was purposefully altered, meaning, I don't think the disappearance of this airplane is accidental.
Click to expand...

Yep...but really...if an actual country wanted to get a plane they could just buy one or use one they already had without stirring up all this. I don't think it's "State sponsored". I think it was a hijacker or maybe even a pilot who went off his nut. The "clues" seem to change every day -- I think the Malaysians are basically incompetent and will go with the fact that the U.S. help is searching in the Indian Ocean.

That's a big place (been there in my Navy days)...chances are a fisherman or a pleasure boater will turn up something eventually. The question is "why"?
 
All I know is the endless speculation brought to us by the news outlets is not doing a damm thing. There's no facts other than the plane didn't arrive as scheduled. Yet the constant blather is mind numbing.
 
Bobw said:
All I know is the endless speculation brought to us by the news outlets is not doing a damm thing. There's no facts other than the plane didn't arrive as scheduled. Yet the constant blather is mind numbing.
Click to expand...
I think part of this endless blather is in today's environment of "instant communication", most cannot conceive, or accept, that sometimes the systems in place cannot give the instant answer demanded by the public. We have forgotten that not too many years ago, news like this would take days to reach around the world.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
I think part of this endless blather is in today's environment of "instant communication", most cannot conceive, or accept, that sometimes the systems in place cannot give the instant answer demanded by the public. We have forgotten that not too many years ago, news like this would take days to reach around the world.
Click to expand...
Yes, and back then nobody cared about ratings (there were only about 7 TV channels.) Now every form of media out there is trying to be the first to come out with the "breaking news" story.
 
BobbyFord said:
Yes, and back then nobody cared about ratings (there were only about 7 TV channels.) Now every form of media out there is trying to be the first to come out with the "breaking news" story.
Click to expand...
And in reality no one is going to care who breaks it, because 30 seconds later it will be on all the stations
 
If this plane showed up on military radar after the transponder was shut off so it is basically unidentified.Why weren't planes sent up to check it out?
 
IIRC it was CBS that reported this plane dropped 40,000 feet in under a minute, then corrected themselves saying it dropped from 40,000 feet to 23,000 in under a minute. Quite the feat seeing it was cruising at 35,000 feet and if it did drop from 35,000 to 23,000 it would attain a airspeed approach Mach 2 and as that would far exceed the speed capability of a 777 it would disintegrate. These comes from 2 pilots on another forum.

How long did it take to find the Titanic?
 
BobbyFord said:
Not many satellites, radar, etc. in 1912 :D
Click to expand...

True but they also had a fairly accurate idea where to search for the Titanic when the technology became available. I don't know if satellites/radar can see hundreds, if not thousands of feet underwater.
Do we have the technology to search thousands of square miles today within a time frame to find survivors??
 
I see that they just said on FOX news that new satellite information shows that the plane intentionally changed course.
So it sounds like military satellites do cover the globe but it takes some time to decipher all the information.
Because obviously that isn't new info....
 
Bobw said:
True but they also had a fairly accurate idea where to search for the Titanic when the technology became available. I don't know if satellites/radar can see hundreds, if not thousands of feet underwater.
Do we have the technology to search thousands of square miles today within a time frame to find survivors??
Click to expand...
Deep water exploration requires the use of ROVs, bathyscaphes or similar vehicles.
WE probably have the technology to search thousands of square miles but this isn't OUR plane. If this was a U.S. based airliner things might be a little different. I picture Gilligan and The Professor in a Malaysian jungle using coconuts and vines in an attempt to radio the missing airliner.
 
BobbyFord said:
Deep water exploration requires the use of ROVs, bathyscaphes or similar vehicles.
WE probably have the technology to search thousands of square miles but this isn't OUR plane. If this was a U.S. based airliner things might be a little different. I picture Gilligan and The Professor in a Malaysian jungle using coconuts and vines in an attempt to radio the missing airliner.
Click to expand...
I know somewhere it was said that we are sending anti-submarine planes to the region.
 
uploadfromtaptalk1395049584567.jpg
 
Not a single news outlet is reporting facts. One station says this, the other says that. Until there's proof positive they all need to STFU and let those who have training, expertise, and experience gained in other crash investigations do what they need to do.
Right now it's all speculation and the only goal is to increase ratings in order to increase the price of airing ads.
 
PERFECT!

Elsewhere someone posted maybe they were on Gilligan's Island and it got real ugly, real fast.
 
Every time I see that there is a new post on here I click on it hoping that they may have actually found this thing or had some actual news, not conjecture. But, alas, no such luck. I'll keep checking though.
 
Bobw said:
IIRC it was CBS that reported this plane dropped 40,000 feet in under a minute, then corrected themselves saying it dropped from 40,000 feet to 23,000 in under a minute. Quite the feat seeing it was cruising at 35,000 feet and if it did drop from 35,000 to 23,000 it would attain a airspeed approach Mach 2 and as that would far exceed the speed capability of a 777 it would disintegrate. These comes from 2 pilots on another forum.

How long did it take to find the Titanic?
Click to expand...

You can easily descend 40,000ft in 1 minute and never exceed the speed of sound, for that matter never exceed M.80 (80% of the speed of sound), which is a common cruise speed for commercial aircraft.

I was jumpseating on a 727 about 10 years ago and we descended from FL340 to 12,000ft in less than 30 seconds due to a rapid loss of pressurization. We never exceeded 320kts indicated (at FL340 we were at a cruise of M.82 and leveled off at about M.65).

You'd be surprised how quickly you can be at altitude and hit the ground.
 
Assuming the timelines of information are sound, these are the things that they should be looking into.

1. Location of hazmat being carried (where were the lithium batteries loaded?)

2. If a battery caught fire would it have affected the avionics bay or other parts of the aircraft that could get a transponder and radio failure? How much additional time can be demonstrated to get an ACARS failure. Do these times look to be close to the timeline of information we have?

I just think there's a good reason to investigate the onboard fire potential. A fire could cause communication failures of all sorts both voice and data. It could also incapacitate the people onboard. They may have lost comms and made an attempt to return to Kuala Lumpur, hence the possible turn and no notification to ATC. Plus, this may have happened so quickly that they may have only disengaged the course hold on the autopilot in order to make the turn back to Kuala Lumpur, but did not disengage the altitude hold. If they were overwhelmed quickly and lost consciousness from smoke and or a loss of pressurization, the aircraft would just wander maintaining level flight until it ran out of fuel.

Just speculation, but we could definitely work to try to replicate it to see if the know evidence matches up. I assume they're running simulations with the historical winds aloft based on potential incapacitation and the last known and speculated heading. With this, I would also focus a search on locations along a perimeter of where the aircraft would have lost fuel. This should be very easy for them to model.
 
shark77 said:
Assuming the timelines of information are sound, these are the things that they should be looking into.

1. Location of hazmat being carried (where were the lithium batteries loaded?)

2. If a battery caught fire would it have affected the avionics bay or other parts of the aircraft that could get a transponder and radio failure? How much additional time can be demonstrated to get an ACARS failure. Do these times look to be close to the timeline of information we have?

I just think there's a good reason to investigate the onboard fire potential. A fire could cause communication failures of all sorts both voice and data. It could also incapacitate the people onboard. They may have lost comms and made an attempt to return to Kuala Lumpur, hence the possible turn and no notification to ATC. Plus, this may have happened so quickly that they may have only disengaged the course hold on the autopilot in order to make the turn back to Kuala Lumpur, but did not disengage the altitude hold. If they were overwhelmed quickly and lost consciousness from smoke and or a loss of pressurization, the aircraft would just wander maintaining level flight until it ran out of fuel.

Just speculation, but we could definitely work to try to replicate it to see if the know evidence matches up. I assume they're running simulations with the historical winds aloft based on potential incapacitation and the last known and speculated heading. With this, I would also focus a search on locations along a perimeter of where the aircraft would have lost fuel. This should be very easy for them to model.
Click to expand...
Gee shark you forgot the little green men with 6 toes on each ear
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom