Due to length part 22 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 23.

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B777-200ER missing enroute KUL-PEK (by Longhornmaniac Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 2 (by LipeGIG Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 3 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 4 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 5 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 6 (by SA7700 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 7 (by SA7700 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines 772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 8 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 9 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 10 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 11 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 12 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 13 (by SA7700 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 14 (by SA7700 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 15 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 16 (by SA7700 Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 17 (by 777ER Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 18 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 19 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 20 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 21 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 22 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)


A select few members have been making remarks towards others in the “Missing Malaysia Airlines 777 threads” for speculating about the fate of 9M-MRO, her crew and passengers. Given the fact that there is so much uncertainty going on at this stage, speculation is going to be a factor on this site and also at the biggest and greatest news corporations of the globe. At least until we all have a clearer picture. Is it a perfect situation – certainly not? That being said, we need to stay dynamic in a possible fast-changing situation.

It is not unique to this incident and if we go back in history and trace remarkable aviation events we will see that speculation has been an aspect, essential to some healthy debate. It is not the intention of the moderators to stifle the opinions of members that fall within the rules-and regulations of airliners.net. All that we kindly request from all our members is to stay within the site’s parameters. Please be respectful towards one another and let us all hope for the best possible outcome.


PLEASE KEEP IN MIND:


**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those onboard MH370; please keep science fiction theories and content related to possible future movie rights out of these threads. ****

**** Please do not repeat questions and scenarios that were covered and discussed in previous threads and which do not contribute in a constructive manner towards the real topic any longer. ****

**** Please make an effort to read through some of the threads, if possible the latest in the series, before adding your own comments and theories to the current, active thread on this issue. ****

**** PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL TOWARDS OTHER USERS AND KEEP THE FORUM RULES AND REGULATIONS IN MIND WHEN POSTING IN THE FORUMS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MODERATORS BY MAKING USE OF THE “SUGGEST DELETION FUNCTION”. ****

**** WHEN STATING FACTS, STATISTICS OR NEWSWORTHY BULLETINS, PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE AN HTML LINK OR REFERENCE TO A PUBLICATION. IF YOU ARE MERELY PROVIDING AN OPINION, PLEASE MENTION THIS IN YOUR POST. IT IS EACH MEMBER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO AVOID ARGUMENTS BASED ON RUMORS OR MISINFORMATION.


Enjoy the forums!

Regards and thanks for your co-operation,

SA7700

[Edited 2014-03-14 06:15:07]

post transplanted from thread 22, without anaesthesia

Quoting evomutant (Reply 247):

I never had a closer look at an FMC, but it wouldn't surprise me if you were only able to enter waypoints, or if the flight plan does not contain an airway, but only waypoints - for backward or forward compatibility. I don't know which FMCs you have used, but this 9M-MRO was 12 years old.

Preselected company routes might have their drawbacks, too. They're not so flexible as if you choose waypoints for every flight.


David

Although the James Bond-style theories about the plane having landed somewhere are quite entertaining, don't you thibk that after seven days virtually every airfield within the range of MH370 has been checked physically / by satellite? While you may land a 777 at many small, unused airfields, you cannot make it disappear after having done so (unless you are one of the villains from the 007 movies). This is particularly true for those islands in the Andaman Sea.

Still dont understand why some make the connection between the captain being an atheist and MH370. It doesnt bear any relevance at all.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 252):
In Islam, one of the worst sins a person can commit is to take one's own life, unless it is for a just and righteous cause as articulated by prophets, Imans i.e which almost always is in the name if Jihad and defending the religion..

A righteous cause, you say. So 9/11 was okay then?  

"Maybe now we can do some REAL flying"? You mean, as in HAND FLYING, which no pilots are really allowed to do anymore, even in their expensive high level simulators? I once made a simulated MD80 for a popular FAA approved PC based simulator and was sent a half dozen emails from real world pilots from non-spoofed company email addresses informing me that they were enjoying flying my creation in the hopes of keeping themselves "in the game" hand flying while off line at home. For Pete's sake folks, real world pilots only really get to flip switches and turn dials anymore due to insurance regs and nervous bean counters. Where are they going to get any real flying time?

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 2): Although the James Bond-style theories about the plane having landed somewhere are quite entertaining, don't you thibk that after seven days virtually every airfield within the range of MH370 has been checked physically / by satellite? While you may land a 777 at many small, unused airfields, you cannot make it disappear after having done so (unless you are one of the villains from the 007 movies). This is particularly true for those islands in the Andaman Sea.

Not to say that anything of the sort actually happened: but if you, as a shadowy organisation of some sort, manage to take something like a T7 rogue for some bizarre nefarious purpose, it is then equally conceivable that you will manage to have some means of camouflage handy at the intended destination by the time the thing gets there.

Just saying, you know. The hard part would be stealing the aircraft, not preparing some camo in the place it will be landing at. And as we all know, a very real a/c has very probably been taken over. So the really bizarre part of the James Bond plot would seem to have already happened. Putting decent camouflage on the thing in a jungle somewhere afterwards would not really stretch the imagination that much further. Except that it would kill any theories about the pilot acting on his own - but then, we are talking about an event that is outside any bell curves of what normally happens anyway. Mr. Bond might as well have his drinks served to him now, and commence working on the case.

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 7): Looks like my map made it to the Guardian:

Have you (or anyone else non-governmental) overlaid the plots onto Google Earth?

IF you were going to suicide and you wanted to cover it up you would want to be sure that you ditched as far away from a known previous point as possible. You would try and fly to this point without detection and at night would be ideal. You would want a large ocean and somewhere deep. The Indian ocean is large and mostly inaccessible from developed countries with SAR resources and with poor radar coverage. The Indian ocean has an average depth of some 4000m.

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 3): Quoting aviators99 (Reply 256): And does this circuitous route avoid well-known RADAR stations, in particular? I have no idea really, but I think it has been mentioned in some thread that there is a radar on the northern tip of Acheh/Sumatra? Then I would assume that there is a good radar around CBD as well and possible at IXZ?

IXZ should have good coverage.

If the route published by Singapore on twitter is based on primary radar data it matches the behavior of an Indian Navy P8-I coming back from a recon mission from South China sea to its base, i.e., stay in the center of Gulf of Thailand, cross Thailand/Malaysia land mass at its narrowest, turn towards Andaman Sea.

But if this route is based on ACARS(or what ever) system pings, different story.

From Part 22:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 235): - How are waypoints loaded into the FMC? After looking at the weather forecast at the flight ops office, you decide for a route, and the planning software prints your route? And then, in the cockpit, you've have to enter the waypoints by hand? - How often do typing errors occur?

Other than the issues already raised, there's a graphical depiction of the programmed flight path where such an accidental error should be quite obvious, even if it's accepted by the system. Then there's the turn at IGARI - that's another opportunity for the crew to spot something very different from what they were expecting. Assuming the Singapore Today map is reliable, for at least three positions to be entered incorrectly by accident is probably pushing it.  

None of us yet know what happened in this case but to dismiss suicide is an error. Psychology is still trying to figure out the reasons people take their lives when they seemingly have everything to live for. A friend of mine hung herself 8 years ago--had just gotten married and was starring in a play in a few days, in fact was publicizing the play online the day before she killed herself.

There's a very well-known story in the area where I live of a woman who jumped off a high bridge. She crossed the bridge every day on her way to work, stopping for coffee at the same place before doing so. The morning she jumped, she stopped for coffee just like any other day. Drove to the top of the bridge, stopped, got out, and jumped--all caught on video due to the place being a popular suicide spot. When the EMT's and police got there, the cup of coffee, half full, was still warm.

More in line with Flight 370, we've had two fatal "driving the wrong way" accidents in my city recently--both are thought to have been suicides. In one the suicide driver killed others in an oncoming car.

And even more recently, a woman tried to kill herself and her kids by driving into the ocean--all caught on tape. But an hour before she had been pulled over by the police and the officer said the woman appeared to be fine.

Just because somebody "seems fine" doesn't mean anything. In fact, if you read a lot on the subject, you find that the reason people seem so at-peace before committing suicide is because the arguments in their head about doing/not doing it are over. There's no more indecision, no agonizing. Now all that has to be done is the act.

So, any of the above stories could easily fit into Flight 370's scenario. Once again, we don't know what happened but a person taking their life along with others isn't unusual, it happens every day.

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 7): Looks like my map made it to the Guardian:

Congratulations.

[Edited 2014-03-14 06:46:28]

The last "ping" over water may just be the point where the pilot realized that that comm was still on and shut it off OR he had planned it that way to make the world believe it crashed in that spot when in reality he flew it to the planned runway. In the end I believe this is a very clever but simple act of air piracy.

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 9): IF you were going to suicide and you wanted to cover it up you would want to be sure that you ditched as far away from a known previous point as possible. You would try and fly to this point without detection and at night would be ideal.

Why exactly would you think so? I mean that one would want to take the plane somewhere where it wouldn't be (easily) found? I have to admit it's hard for me to understand the logic that would be going on in the head of somebody trying to kill yourself.
Particularly a pilot that would take a few hundred people with them by crashing the plane, rather than resorting to one of the slightly less headline-grabbing methods used by other people (tablets, jump from a bridge, etc.).
So you're taking a few hundred people with you, you know you're going to be creating big headlines anyway due to your chosen way of ending your life - but you don't want to be found?
It's baffling, but then, the whole concept of taking a few hundred people with you on your way out is baffling to me.

I've said this all along, bottom line, almost one full week from the disappearance of MH370 there is no evidence of debris. This is baffling.

I Google Earth my aunt's apartment in Italy, and believe it or not, from the overhead view, I could actually see her getting into her car with a plastic grocery store-type shopping bag. Yes, from space!

So, with that being said, and take this next comment with a grain of salt, I find it tremendously ironic that all the governments in the world have no clue where this plane is, especially with all the technology that is available today.

Either someone is dragging their feet or we are deliberately being spun in circles with information because there is a greater issue behind the scenes. This I'm convinced of.

If, for some reason, after this is all said and done, it is determined that this was purely an ACCIDENT, then the ICAO needs to MANDATE specific legislation that requires major ETOPS carriers to have data - CVR and FDR - transmitted real-time to land based stations.

What's this business that "MH didn't subscribe to a full ACARS package"...what kind of nonsense is that? You are taking souls over water, over vast stretches of abandoned land, and this add-on is optional???

Just like airlines must subscribe to certain airport taxes, well, they should have to subscribe to real-time transmitting info services, especially considering an event like this or that of AF447.

Penny wise, dollar foolish.

WSJ: "U.S. aviation investigators said they were analyzing the satellite transmissions to determine whether they can glean information about the plane's ultimate location or status. The transmissions were sent via onboard technology designed to send routine maintenance and system-monitoring data back to the ground via satellite links, according to the people familiar with the matter.

Among the possible scenarios investigators said they are now considering is whether the jet may have landed at any point during the five-hour period under scrutiny, or whether it ultimately crashed."

The waypoint insertion case:
Modern aviation is based on... data bases (!). There are a few stored routes for a given flight, coded like JFKCDG1...
That route is just input-ted into the FMS, et voilà, you have all all your flight plan !
For Atlantic crossings, as tracks change all the timle, you have to build your route thus : XXX SID MISTYONE... Direct to (Exit point), Direct to NyyyWzzz...... Direct to entry point to DEST... STAR FOGGY 9... Then you xcheck on the map on PLAN, check the distances gel with your printed plan... NOt much opportunity for typing mistakes here.

The cargo fire scenario:
Expressed in different forms : dangerous cargo (subject to international regulations, documented, loaded according to strict rules on quantity/place of storage/possible adverse copmbination with other items...
Problem for that scenario is that all cargo compartments are now Class C : well isolated from the airframe and the cabin, with as set of fire/smoke detectors and extinguishers that discharge continuously into the compartment. The 777 has five of them, two will discharge imlmediately and the remaining three will ^provide acontinuous stream of extigushing agent to keep the fire out or at least down.That reg comes from ETOPS requirements, but has been as a matter of fact with us for 25 years or so. There is plenty of time to divert and land, especially in that well populated region.

The Hollywood / Bollywood hijack scenarii : They do not address the main question : the loss of contact with the crew, almost immediately after a routine switching off message.

The suicide scenario : Someone enthusiastic enough about his job to the point of buiding a home sim for fun, or another who likes life and women enough are in my humble opinion not likely candidates .

Mid air collision with another aircraft / a drone / a Missile / a UFO... someone must have an idea of what was lost beside Flight 370, except the aliens. Would they please stand up and come clean with their missing saucer !

Now some aspects on modern airliners : they are, especially FBW ones incredibly stable. Theyu won't fall out of the sky just because navigation/ Automatic flight computers / incapacited pilots are no longer there. The trajectory would be anyone's guess, though.

The rest of the speculations are, I'm afraid a lot of Bravo Sierra verging on complete drooling idiocy.
(Rant off)

This event is certainly not the media finest hour !

[Edited 2014-03-14 06:51:53]

Quoting Pihero (Reply 19): The suicide scenario : Someone enthusiastic enough about his job to the point of buiding a home sim for fun, or another who likes life and women enough are in my humble opinion not likely candidates .

You can't deduce someone's mental state from the few facts you cite. Sabotage/suicide by one of the pilot's remains the most likely scenario at this time. Flying the aircraft potentially hours off course is likely an intentional act.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 19): The Hollywood / Bollywood hijack scenarii : They do not address the main question : the loss of contact with the crew, almost immediately after a routine switching off message.

        

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 17): What's this business that "MH didn't subscribe to a full ACARS package"...what kind of nonsense is that? You are taking souls over water, over vast stretches of abandoned land, and this add-on is optional???

Would that have saved 1 soul in this case?

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 17): I Google Earth my aunt's apartment in Italy, and believe it or not, from the overhead view, I could actually see her getting into her car with a plastic grocery store-type shopping bag. Yes, from space!

You realize that's old imagery, right? Few countries have the access to enough space-based assets to quickly image such large areas.

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 17): What's this business that "MH didn't subscribe to a full ACARS package"...what kind of nonsense is that? You are taking souls over water, over vast stretches of abandoned land, and this add-on is optional???

It is not a safety feature. It is a maintenance/diagnostic reporting system. If they don't want to pay for it, and it makes their airplane harder to maintain, tough titties for them.

What are the actual capabilities of "fly by wire"? Is this completely out of the question? I assume that the ACARS system would be the way in?

Quoting aw70 (Reply 21):

Not that I have any counterterrorism experience whatsoever, but it seems to me that the quicker the delivery means of an unconventional weapon from a "friendly location" to target, the higher the likelihood of success. To get a stolen nuke from its origins (ostensibly the Middle East) to a yacht sailing into L.A. takes a lot of logistical coordination and time to be discovered by military sailing vessels, other nations, etc.

With a 777-ER, all you'd do is slip the nuke onboard at your friendly origin and then fly over radar-sparse waters the entire way until you're about to make landfall in the U.S. It's going to be a lot more difficult for military radars to pick up something coming in from a low trajectory (say, the plane descends to 1000 feet off the East Coast and then comes in) until the thing is almost above you. Then, even if you do shoot it down, you set off a nuclear explosion above a populated area.

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 5):

Um....I believe you are misinformed.

This is my final post (i know, thank god). Sometimes people commit heinous acts simply because they can. Human behavior doesn't always have to abide by some logical template. That is very much the case here. This guy (pilot) is showing us all just how smart and cute he is (and it's working). There is no sense to be had here because he has purposely set out to make everything as non-sensical as possible, confounding beyond anything that would seemingly stand to reason. Every action that this a/c undertook was at the behest and command of this pilot. To still believe otherwise is to to try and weave together not only the unlikely and improbable, but the downright impossible, into the most incredulous of narratives. Lets see, maybe this and then that, and then maybe this and what about that. Come on folks, seriously. Yeah, much of this, by calculating design, doesn't fit neatly into the "logic" playbook---It's been planned and executed in such a way to do the exact opposite, to be downright confrontational and an affront to our sensibilities. Hell, life itself doesn't make sense in the abstract, and that's precisely the point that this delusional man is forcing us to confront. Well, sorry for perhaps inappropriate tone at times, nothing personal, just frustration boiling over. Wish I wasn't right about this whole mess, but I am.

Quoting blueheronNC (Reply 24): Then, even if you do shoot it down, you set off a nuclear explosion above a populated area.

There's a lot wrong with your theory, but I'll focus on this. A nuclear weapon (aside from being terribly difficult to acquire) does not get "set off" when you hit it with a missile. A modern warhead is almost impossible, if not actually impossible, to set off by accident. They must be triggered.

Quoting Pihero:

The Hollywood / Bollywood hijack scenarii : They do not address the main question : the loss of contact with the crew, almost immediately after a routine switching off message

What if the crew were involved?

Quoting sipadan (Reply 26):

How does anyone actual know what plays into the logic playbook? We need to know what happened before we can begin to assess the logical steps taken to achieve the goal. You're putting the cart before the horse here. It all seems "cute and clever" because you're stumped. When ALL of the facts are clear, more likely than not every step of the way will have a clear, logical motivation.

I think sipodan has made some good comments, and that are being overly criticized.

Furthermore, it is my personal suspicion one of the crew disabled the other, and flew the aircraft to avoid detection.

While most in these threads have focused on landing strips/airports, I think this is a wrong course of action to take. Airports are located near populations. And for the most part, populations will talk. If there's a 777 sitting at any airport short of Groom Lake people would be talking.

Assuming a "rogue" crew member, it seems they were not intent on death immediately, and had a wish to live for at least a while longer. It is my thought that the aircraft will be found intentionally ditched adjacent an unpopulated island such as...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcondam_Island

Furthermore, I would suggest it is very uncommon for professional pilots to have extensive flight sim set ups for recreational purposes. Most get their fix at work, or fly general aviation aircraft. That being said, I do use a simple laptop sim for check ride prep, familiarizing myself with memory items, call outs, and procedures while flying the aircraft.

SLCPilot

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 2): Although the James Bond-style theories about the plane having landed somewhere are quite entertaining, don't you thibk that after seven days virtually every airfield within the range of MH370 has been checked physically / by satellite? While you may land a 777 at many small, unused airfields, you cannot make it disappear after having done so (unless you are one of the villains from the 007 movies). This is particularly true for those islands in the Andaman Sea.

I'm not aware that they photographed every possible airfield via satellite. That's a lot of airfields. Someone would have to give the order, or pay for that.

What many people don't realize is that satellite photography is quite tedious and complicated. Movies gives us the impression that they simply direct the camera lense to whatever they're interested in and snap away. In reality, in order to deliver a usable resolution, satellites must be in low earth orbit; that means, they move extremely fast. You therefore need to plot their route to pass over the area of interest, by day of course, and exactly over the area you have the satellite take the pictures. That's a major operation that needs some planning; to do it for every small airfield seems quite impossible.

Also, can you make a 777 disappear? Doesn't seem totally impossible to me. Torch the plane, bury all that remains and cover the area with earth or sand, given some manpower I think that can be done in less than 24 hours.

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 17): If, for some reason, after this is all said and done, it is determined that this was purely an ACCIDENT, then the ICAO needs to MANDATE specific legislation that requires major ETOPS carriers to have data - CVR and FDR - transmitted real-time to land based stations. What's this business that "MH didn't subscribe to a full ACARS package"...what kind of nonsense is that? You are taking souls over water, over vast stretches of abandoned land, and this add-on is optional???

Let's not forget that MH370 is a one-of-a-kind occurrence. For decades, aircraft have taken souls over water just fine. Seems a bit unreasonable to call all this into question just because of this one case - and so far we have no idea whether it was an accident or a voluntary act, in the latter case mandatory reporting wouldn't have helped anyway.

Quoting Rara (Reply 32): Also, can you make a 777 disappear? Doesn't seem totally impossible to me. Torch the plane, bury all that remains and cover the area with earth or sand, given some manpower I think that can be done in less than 24 hours.

Or just park it in a hanger / warehouse.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 1): Malaysia ATC: OK, you're on your way. Good night. Vietnam ATC: ...must be a delay. No MH370 coming... wait... wait... wait... wait... So nobody asks a question. That's the hole in your reply. It's still possible that MH370 thought it was very well under way on the correct routing, while actually flying westwards over the Malay/Thai peninsula.

I disagree. I think that the possibility of the pilots losing situational awareness and flying the total wrong way back across the Malaysian peninsula, without being detected AND 'accidentally' switching off their transponder at the time they inputted erroneous data to the FMS.....yeah. To me, that fails the razor.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 22): Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 17):I Google Earth my aunt's apartment in Italy, and believe it or not, from the overhead view, I could actually see her getting into her car with a plastic grocery store-type shopping bag. Yes, from space! You realize that's old imagery, right? Few countries have the access to enough space-based assets to quickly image such large areas.

The image would have been made from an airplane.

[Edited 2014-03-14 07:41:33]

Quoting aw70 (Reply 21): But as I said, I do not buy this, as everyone who would be a really good potential target (US, Israel) has very good airspace defences,

There may be some missile defense but a plane coming in low w/o a transponder on could make it rather far before an attempt would be made to check it out let alone stop it. Terrorists have realized you can't hijack a plane "911 style" so you now have to supply your own. Coastal cities are the most at risk.

I think this is damn serious. Even if this is NOT the case here, no doubt the terrorists are talking about this scheme.

Quoting blueheronNC (Reply 24):

The sum of all fears. I hope analysts in high places are keeping such scenarios in mind.

Thoughts based on the US confirming the receipt of pings for several hours after loss of the transponder and the non-synchronization of the shut off of the transponder and other systems, and reported/suspected diverted flight path to the West.
Given this updated information it would seem that this therefore could have been a hijacking which could have evolved as:
MH370 flies from WMKK to IGORI WP at which time transponder and comms. turned off and turns Westward (to avoid Chinese ATC)
May have descended to low altitude to avoid primary radar and flies a flight path westward avoiding primary radar facilities range
Heading westward to an airport out in the Indian Ocean, maybe to a small island in the Ocean yet B777 capable runway.
If highjacking, the highjackers may not have considered the extra drag at low altitude and consequent premature fuel exhaustion.
The winds aloft difference from previous flight plan to Beijing (tailwind) versus winds at lower altitude for a Westward path (headwinds) may have caused a fuel exhaustion.
Just an educated guess, but the island of Hulhumale in the Maldives seems to fit the reported/estimated flight time of 4 hours after IGORI WP (at normal TAS) confirmed by pings, the reported/estimated direction, an adequate B777 runway in the middle of the ocean, etc.
If it landed, this presents an even more alarming situation.

The jury's out about what actually happened, but if putting the pieces together regarding what's now being reported seems to indicate a potential highjacking attempt.

Quoting blueheronNC (Reply 24):

Shooting down a nuclear device doesn't generally create a nuclear reaction, but would create a dirty bomb.

Quoting hamiltondaniel (Reply 27): There's a lot wrong with your theory, but I'll focus on this. A nuclear weapon (aside from being terribly difficult to acquire) does not get "set off" when you hit it with a missile. A modern warhead is almost impossible, if not actually impossible, to set off by accident. They must be triggered.

What I mean is that the pilot engages whatever trigger has been fitted on the warhead when he realizes he's being shot down, or (and I don't know how this would work) has some sort of "dead man's switch" that triggers it if the plane is shot down.

One of the best articles I've read so far: Link

Quote: Deep distrust between Asian neighbours and sensitive security issues are jamming essential communication lines in the chaotic hunt for a Malaysia Airlines plane, analysts said Thursday. "The issues of protecting territory, security intelligence and interests are starting to win over the common goal of finding the plane and closure."

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 7): "The French aviation site Air Info has a more detailed map of the missing plane possible flight path based on that Reuters story. " http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...tes#block-5322f4fce4b0e42fe2827633 http://twitter.com/AirInfoAviation/status/444431850102988800/photo/1 http://airinfo.org/2014/03/14/dispar...dien/

Am I reading the French map from the twitter right in seeing that they flew a route that roughly follows the edges of ATC zones? Or do those black lines that roughly parallel the route identified by the red line, mean something else?

Quoting COEWR787 (Reply 43): Am I reading the French map from the twitter right in seeing that they flew a route that roughly follows the edges of ATC zones?

It does appear so doesn't it?

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 16): , for some reason, after this is all said and done, it is determined that this was purely an ACCIDENT, then the ICAO needs to MANDATE specific legislation that requires major ETOPS carriers to have data - CVR and FDR - transmitted real-time to land based stations. What's this business that "MH didn't subscribe to a full ACARS package"...what kind of nonsense is that? You are taking souls over water, over vast stretches of abandoned land, and this add-on is optional??? Just like airlines must subscribe to certain airport taxes, well, they should have to subscribe to real-time transmitting info services, especially considering an event like this or that of AF447. Penny wise, dollar foolish.

Hindsight is 20/20. I agree 100% except that I would add that these be mandatory regardless of whether this is ultimately determined to be an accident or not .

And I know very little about this so may be wrong, but this doesn't seem that it would be very expensive in the larger scheme of things. And once the flight has landed the data can be erased or written over by the subsequent flight so it shouldn't require huge amounts of data storage space either.

A range ring of about 2500 nm has been displayed and discussed but that assumes a fuel load for PEK. Has anyone posted the actual fuel load and TOW?

Quoting Rara (Reply 32): Also, can you make a 777 disappear? Doesn't seem totally impossible to me. Torch the plane, bury all that remains and cover the area with earth or sand, given some manpower I think that can be done in less than 24 hours.

Including the passengers?   

Thanks,
Cary

The top 3 reasons the world must find this MH370 777, in no particular order

1. If there is serious design flaw or system failure that puts at risk the millions of passengers that fly the 777 each month
2. If the aircraft has been "stolen" and has the potential to be later used as a target carrying nuclear arsenal
3. For the sake of the families and friends of those missing

Quoting JimJupiter (Reply 20): Would that have saved 1 soul in this case?

We don't know that any souls have been lost, yet - so the answer is theortically yes. Imagine some of the more nefarious state-sponsored theories actually panning out here.

It very well could save a soul or 239.

Has the ground tarmac crew, which prepared the 777 before flight, been questioned about eventual remarkable events (special uncommon preparations, special/secret cargo etc., strange flight crew behaviour) before the flight? How much kerosine was taken? Kuala Lumpur - Bejing + 1 hour extra?

I have to say that after reading every single post, being an aviation geek for over the past 40 years, and working in the industry for 25 years, it seems to me that the most logical, albeit not necessarily correct, scenario is pilot suicide. Mental issues and suicide are sometimes very simple and sometimes very complicated. There is no way anyone on this site can make blanket statements about the pilots' mental condition.

There seem to be many people who are very knowledgeable and respected on this site who desperately seem to want to dismiss it outright. Is this wishful thinking, pilot bias, or a combination? If you put all the pieces together, it seems to be one of the more plausible explanations, at this point. The flight simulator in the PIC's home could or could not be relevant at all. Just because many pilots have simulators doesn't mean that this pilot, or the co-pilot, did not at some point decide to commit suicide.

There are not many logical explanations for going dark during an ATC switch, flying through an area with much less radar coverage then the alternative, and heading toward an isolated and extremely deep part of the ocean. The shame of suicide, killing hundreds of innocent people, and subjecting your family, friends, and company to unnecessary pain and suffering also could support this scenario.

I, like the rest of you, am baffled, but with no wreckage and what we know, suicide by one of the pilots, seems as plausible as any other theory. However, there are other possibilities as well, some even more unlikely. I do think that making statements like many pilots have simulators so this doesn't make sense, or saying that these pilots had no logical reason to commit suicide with a full load of passengers is very short-sighted, especially when we're considering some other pretty wild and unlikely scenarios as well.

Whatever lookdown/shootdown assets we still have (speaking USA here) might want to be positioned up over both coasts for awhile. Good drill at the worst.

If you successfully landed a stolen 777, when you took off again to do your "bad stuff" could you spoof the transponder of another a/c? I.e. get close enough on a regular airway to avoid suspicion then fly on the deck to target?