MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 24

spacecadet · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:41 am

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 392):
That seems premature to me.

It's highly likely they have more evidence than what's been released publicly. And I don't mean they're hiding it, I just mean it takes everyone a while to look over things and put them together before they release them to the public. By tomorrow, we'll probably know why they came to this conclusion.

Remember also that they've been behind the curve for a while now. The US and others have been feeding them lots of data, which they've officially, at least, pretty consistently either downplayed or outright denied. So it sounds like a big neck snap when they finally come around, but really they're just saying what a lot of others have obviously been thinking, based on all the available evidence so far.

But I have a feeling there will be more released tomorrow (today); something that demonstrates why they feel this is "conclusive".

tomlee · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:41 am

A class D fire as other's have mentioned (lithium being an obvious metal) would not be suppressed by halon alone nor de-pressurization even at high altitudes. Depending on how the batteries where packed if they were tightly bound and close backed in a big package or case the smoke could be trapped while the intensity inside the bag reached extreme temperatures until it burned through the bag as a molten mass hot enough to make everything around it auto-ignite. Smoke detection would be delayed and not of much use and all fire suppression as stated before would not be effective in controlling a class D fire until it burnt itself out.

Unlike the cargo plane accidents there might have been less lithium metal as to not burn long enough to take the entire plane down immediately but enough to knock out a lot of systems and people/crew. (Where is the cockpit oxygen system stored for the cockpit as that has a very limited operating temperature in the event of a fire and the lithum fire's previously generated almost immediately incapacitating fumes with high levels of carbon monoxide and other fun/acutely toxic combustion byproducts)

That being said any confirmation of deliberate and controlled flight (the satcom data) does offer other possibilities.

Quoting bermudatriangle (Reply 391):

The 40kfpm descent from the engine data doesn't make sense and happened early on if the news story is correct or I'm not actually sure what they were referring too as other reports said the engine data stopped before they lost the transponder. The news story's themselves say the data was discounted but why it is so inaccurate is a bit strange without generating bad sounding errors at the same time. (Electrical/computer problems?)

flood · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:42 am

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 383):
Malaysia confirms Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 was hijacked
[...]
The Malaysian prime minister is expected to brief the media later today.

The PM's twitter account states "PM Najib Razak will be making a press statement at approximately 1.30pm today, regarding #MH370"
http://twitter.com/NajibRazak/status/444691444008116224

That's about 50 minutes from now.

SuseJ772 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:42 am

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 392):
I find it interesting that they have no new evidence - they have merely decided that the evidence they have conclusively proves that the flight was hijacked.

Agree 100% with your statement.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 395):
I'm sure they know more than us... not in a conspiracy theory sense, but just in general. People in the know seem to know more. They must be pretty sure to say it with such certainty...

But as I read it, the Malaysians are saying that, and, no offense to them, they haven't been the ones in the know. It's been the Americans that have provided the "true" leaks, and according to the article, they are still saying it is a possibility, but not a certainty.

chrisrad · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:44 am

Have not heard this area being discussed yet!! Amazing

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 384):
KUALA LUMPUR - The last satellite transmission from a Malaysian airliner missing for a week has been traced to the Indian Ocean off Australia

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...d-be-traced-sea-australia-20140315

flymia · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:45 am

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 383):
The official said that hijacking was no longer a theory. “It is conclusive,’’ he added.

If it is "conclusive' they must have a lot more information than they are sharing with the public. That being said they don't need to share it to the public but they better share it with other countries governments.

Quoting dreamflight767 (Reply 386):
What about the "Tech Crew"?

The tech crew was the two pilots. There were only two pilots on this flight, typical for a 6 hour flight.

SuseJ772 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 398):
I hear you on finding the bloody airport!

First Mandela thanks me for providing the Tomnod data, and then you confirm to me that even the best of pilots (as I hold you as one) have a hard time finding the airport at night sometimes. I'd consider these threads a good booster to my self-esteem. I thought I was the only one that had a hard time with out the aid of instruements

DeltaAtl · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:47 am

So apparently a news Conf is schld in an hour or 1:30 Malay time and the authorities will announce it's a hijacking!

http://bit.ly/1iM50o0

tim73 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:49 am

They had plenty of fuel to reach north-west Australia. This latest info just does not make any sense! Unless they flew so low and fast that the fuel consumption skyrocketed?

ivanoruvan · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:50 am

If it's a hijack theory there has to be a military intelligence feeding the hijackers. To avoid the international military radars or where to land. How many countries have military and terrorists hand-in-hand? I know at least 2 in this part of the world. Don't ask me which. Question is, who has the guts to do it? (especially when US is against all forms of terrorism and China will defend it's nationalities vigorously) Opposing these two at the same time is asking for it.

CO953 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:50 am

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 404):
User currently offlinechrisrad From Australia, joined Dec 2000, 1042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 404, posted Fri Mar 14 2014 23:44:21 your local time (2 minutes 5 secs ago) and read 322 times:

Have not heard this area being discussed yet!! Amazing

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 384):
KUALA LUMPUR - The last satellite transmission from a Malaysian airliner missing for a week has been traced to the Indian Ocean off Australia

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...d-be-traced-sea-australia-20140315

Functional LINK HERE:
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...d-be-traced-sea-australia-20140315

[Edited 2014-03-14 21:51:39]

Razza74 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:50 am

Oh dear, if the article is correct
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...d-be-traced-sea-australia-20140315
and MH370 did go down west of Perth there is a lot of ocean to cover

Australia is responsible for over 10% of the Earth's surface with regard to SAR

https://www.amsa.gov.au

Dreamflight767 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:52 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 405):
The tech crew was the two pilots. There were only two pilots on this flight, typical for a 6 hour flight.

Thanks, didn't know they called Pilots "Tech Crew." Thought they were some MX folks or something of that nature.

jetfuel · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:53 am

Going out on a very wide tangent here but what if the 2 Iranian asylum seekers were originally hoping to get to Australia by illegal people smuggling vessels. Since the Australian crack down is it possible that these 2 men hijacked MH370 to Australia?

panampaul · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:57 am

It sounds like they are going all out with the hijack "theory."

The Malaysian Prime Minister has a news conference in 30 min.

Quote:
At 12:40 p.m. local time on Saturday, the Malaysian prime minister’s Twitter account dispatched a message saying that “PM Najib Razak will be making a press statement at approximately 1.30pm today, regarding #MH370.”...

from

Malaysian Official: Missing Plane Was Hijacked

...

seb146 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:58 am

I heard something interesting that 20 of the passengers all worked for the same software firm. Let me adjust my tin foil hat while we ponder on that one....

tim73 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:58 am

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 414):
Going out on a very wide tangent here but what if the 2 Iranian asylum seekers were originally hoping to get to Australia by illegal people smuggling vessels. Since the Australian crack down is it possible that these 2 men hijacked MH370 to Australia?

The question is, if they did that and flew low to avoid radars through Indonesia, would that mean the fuel ran out before reaching Australia?

chaseus1 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:58 am

Many threads ago I felt it was a botched hijacking. Still feeling that way, though I would not claim it to be conclusive yet based on the info we have... I am no more sure than I was yesterday, but I do feel it was a botched hijacking that didn't work out they way they (whoever they are) wanted. When I first posted, there were many discussions about the plane landing somewhere. I don't believe they landed anywhere, and I do believe it crashed.

Maybe new evidence has surfaced that Malaysian authorities have that we do not have yet. I certainly think it was hijacked, but I wouldn't say its conclusive based upon what WE know.

Maybe it is a sad blessing the plane crashed.... and didnt reach a target. I still think the hijacker or hijackers may have tried to follow a plan, and then got lost after awhile. Maybe they didnt realize how fast things happen at 500 mph crossing narrow strips of land.

RIP to the victims.

SuseJ772 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:59 am

Quoting Razza74 (Reply 412):
and MH370 did go down west of Perth there is a lot of ocean to cover

That's interesting because Perth is almost the exact same distance as Beijing.

http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=k...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=

b777erj145 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:00 am

after reading all these post I am starting to believe that the plane was hijacked and was crashed later due to structure failure (being climbed upto 45000).

spacecadet · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:00 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 409):
They had plenty of fuel to reach north-west Australia.

Did they? It seems awfully far for them to have gone north, then west, then south, then back east to Australia, while avoiding land-based radars as much as possible (except the one that caught them over Malaysia). They wouldn't have gone straight there; they'd have made sort of a circle around. I'm not sure if they'd have had enough fuel.

I mentioned the Ethiopian 961 scenario as a possibility a few threads ago; that may very well be what we're looking at here.

Razza74 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:01 am

Does any one know if the Australian Defence Force Jindalee Over the horizon Radar Network was working on the evening of this event?

If so could it have picked up the flight?

btfarrwm · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:02 am

It occurred to me In the past week that the Australian Outback could provide an Edwards AFB -like place to land a 777, but I thought it was too crazy to post. Perhaps not,

SuseJ772 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:03 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 416):
I heard something interesting that 20 of the passengers all worked for the same software firm. Let me adjust my tin foil hat while we ponder on that one....

I believe they were semi-conductor, not software. But I may be mistaken. I made a point about that as well in my post about Chinese espionage. It's hardly conclusive. But it does beg a question.

tim73 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:04 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 421):
Did they?

Well, according to this, they had plenty:

http://leehamnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/mh370-search-area.jpg

dcsben · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:07 am

If non-pilot hijackers intended to go west or south, why would they have targeted a flight heading north east? Why turn around, fly over the peninsula and risk being noticed by primary radar?

N328KF · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:08 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 416):

I heard something interesting that 20 of the passengers all worked for the same software firm. Let me adjust my tin foil hat while we ponder on that one....

Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 424):
I believe they were semi-conductor, not software. But I may be mistaken. I made a point about that as well in my post about Chinese espionage. It's hardly conclusive. But it does beg a question.

They were Freescale employees going to a meeting. Ten years ago, you would have known this firm as Motorola. IBM made the same mistake in the 1980s when the head of their IBM PC project (Don Estridge) and a bunch of IBM employees and family members were on Delta 191 together. That flight crashed, and the IBM mainframe division took over the PC division, reversed several of Estridge's decisions, subsequently losing massive market share.

Dalavia · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:09 am

Quoting dcsben (Reply 426):

If non-pilot hijackers intended to go west or south, why would they have targeted a flight heading north east? Why turn around, fly over the peninsula and risk being noticed by primary radar?

Perhaps the plane flying north-east was carrying something that the hijackers wanted?

flyorski · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:11 am

Quoting btfarrwm (Reply 423):

It occurred to me In the past week that the Australian Outback could provide an Edwards AFB -like place to land a 777, but I thought it was too crazy to post. Perhaps not,

It has occurred to myself as well. This latest information of the aircraft almost reaching Australia reminds me of Banjawarn station. The fact that Aum Shinrikyo owned places like this and used it for nefarious purposes including a rumored, now discredited, nuclear explosion.

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

spacecadet · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:12 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 425):
Well, according to this, they had plenty:

Maybe... but first, those are just estimates - do we really know how much fuel they actually had to start with? Then you have to consider the flight path, which from what I've seen went further west-northwest than the arrow on that map shows (which has it going southwest). And the inner circle there is based on its last known position, not its position prior to turning south towards Australia. They'd have had to immediately turn towards Australia after their last known position for that map to be valid.

I don't know, it seems like it would be very close. The fact that we've heard nothing from the hijackers suggests to me that they didn't make it, wherever they were heading. Although the news reports right now (everyone seems to be printing the same wire report) talk about the hijackers as if the plane landed somewhere. But that's probably an assumption the media's making.

ASMVPGOLD · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:14 am

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 414):
Going out on a very wide tangent here but what if the 2 Iranian asylum seekers were originally hoping to get to Australia by illegal people smuggling vessels. Since the Australian crack down is it possible that these 2 men hijacked MH370 to Australia?

It they wanted to go to Australia it would have been much (MUCH) easier to have just purchased tickets from KUL-> Australia instead of purchasing tickets to Europe.... so I think that theory is out.

SuseJ772 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:17 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 430):
do we really know how much fuel they actually had to start with?

This is a question many of us have been asking this whole time, a relatively easy question for authorities to answer, yet no one has answered it to my knowledge. It is one of the more striking pieces of evidence to indicate pilot guilt if that number is different than expected. Yet no one has answered one way or another. It really makes me wonder.

bermudatriangle · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:18 am

I think a detour south into the depths of the Indian Ocean (article seems to say 1k miles west of Perth, so still hours from Australian coast) fits with the murder / suicide theory and the idea that the terrorist pilot was "joyriding" and leading investigators on a chase before offing himself

k83713 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:20 am

If the logic of hijackers was to stay undetected as much as possible and the plane stayed in the air close to its maximum allowed by fuel on board, it can significantly narrow search sector in Indian Ocean. Biggest probability would be the most distant point from the land...
It's sad however that a week was lost and who knows what debris are looking like now, we're they spread around and where is the FDR, which condition it's in. I hope it survived the impact, because it's the only thing from the board to witness what happened...

All the story should have big consequences to safety procedures, changes should come like they came after 9/11.

flymia · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:21 am

Quoting b777erj145 (Reply 419):
after reading all these post I am starting to believe that the plane was hijacked and was crashed later due to structure failure (being climbed upto 45000).

The engines would stall out before any structural issues.

fiscal · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:21 am

In every hijacking I have known, the perpetrators want international attention to voice their message. They may plan well, execute it well, but in the end, their primary aim is to get that attention. The 911 hijackings were a bit different, but again the final act was to get attention, and the terrorist organizations were vocal and accepted responsibility.

In this case, if it is a hijacking, then to date no credible organization has owned up, so maybe it was a case of the pilots/crew/passengers knowing that their futures may be short lived, took action to make sure that the hijackers would perish with them before any further act could be carried out. Far fetched I know, especially if out in the middle of the ocean.

BoeingVista · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:22 am

Quoting btfarrwm (Reply 423):
It occurred to me In the past week that the Australian Outback could provide an Edwards AFB -like place to land a 777, but I thought it was too crazy to post. Perhaps not,

I've driven though the outback, no people, no mobile phone coverage, massive amounts of space, mostly flat.. But you would have to sneek it in past a pretty decent radar set.

tortugamon · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:22 am

Anyone know how to watch the presser?

tortugamon

PHX Flyer · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:23 am

Quoting btfarrwm (Reply 422):
It occurred to me In the past week that the Australian Outback could provide an Edwards AFB -like place to land a 777,

But what would be the point of landing it there? Obviously, there is no point keeping it here permanently, and refueling it to fly on from there would be quite a challenge.

spacecadet · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:24 am

Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 431):
This is a question many of us have been asking this whole time, a relatively easy question for authorities to answer, yet no one has answered it to my knowledge.

Hopefully they've looked into that now that they've concluded that someone with "experience flying" hijacked the plane. You would think the fuel load ordered by the pilots would be the first thing they'd look at in that case.

They've resisted this theory until now, so they probably saw no reason to look into it before, by their way of thinking.

Quoting fiscal (Reply 435):
In every hijacking I have known, the perpetrators want international attention to voice their message.

Most hijackers just want to get somewhere other than where the plane was originally going.

[Edited 2014-03-14 22:25:30]

flymia · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:24 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 437):
Anyone know how to watch the presser?

Had the same question. U.S. Stations have gone to pre-recorded news/shows. Hoping RT or CCTV has it on. Watching CCTV and nothing about the upcoming conference but they do have an interview with the CEO of MH.

CCTV will be showing it. Press Conference is about to start.

[Edited 2014-03-14 22:28:05]

airlanka · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:25 am

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 427):
Perhaps the plane flying north-east was carrying something that the hijackers wanted?

Well there was a load of Lithium batteries on board according to the reports. This can be easily can be converted to explosives in my view… So is this something that influenced potential hijackers to select this flight to hijack.

Then it poses the question if there is more to come on this incident. Perhaps the plane was landed and then converted to a flying bomb…. ?????

tortugamon · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:25 am

Got it:

http://english.astroawani.com/

tortugamon

BoeingVista · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:26 am

Quoting PHX Flyer (Reply 438):
But what would be the point of landing it there? Obviously, there is no point keeping it here permanently, and refueling it to fly on from there would be quite a challenge.

Yup, getting fuel into the outback unnoticed would be a challange and the positioning doesn't lend itself to any real target. Not a logical place to take the 777 to.

JAAlbert · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:29 am

So, with the hijacking theory now front and center - who on board did the deed?

1. Pilots: We haven't heard any credible reports that the pilots were facing financial or emotional difficulties, and if not the pilots, who on board could commandeer a plane and fly it for four or more hours?

2. Chinese Passengers: Nearly two hundred of the passengers are Chinese citizens - China has faced a number of hijacking attempts over the past several years so I suppose a disgruntled citizen could be behind this. But how many private Chinese citizens are pilots? Does China permit private aviation?

3. If not a Chinese citizen, then we've got the two Iranian citizens with the fake passports. No info has been released suggesting they are hijackers.

4. Which leaves the flight attendants, the tech crew and a smattering of persons from other countries.

Any thoughts?

RickNRoll · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:33 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 439):
Most hijackers just want to get somewhere other than where the plane was originally going.

If you are in Malaysia, there is no need to hijack a plane to go anywhere.

spacecadet · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:35 am

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 445):
If you are in Malaysia, there is no need to hijack a plane to go anywhere.

Not sure what you mean by this.

chaseus1 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:36 am

Quoting dcsben (Reply 425):
If non-pilot hijackers intended to go west or south, why would they have targeted a flight heading north east? Why turn around, fly over the peninsula and risk being noticed by primary radar?

Maybe their intent was just to turn around and try to find a target in Malaysia, and ended up getting lost. The 9/11 planes all turned back east.

The flight path seemed erratic at first. I just think a non-pilot hijacker may have thought some city may have been easy to see at night, but had no clue how fast 500 mph is.

Or maybe their was a long drawn out battle in the cockpit like the FedEx attack years ago, between injured pilots and a hijacker, and in the end no one was in shape to fly the plane.

SA7700 · Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:37 am

Due to length this thread will be locked for further contributions. All posts added after the thread lock will be removed for housekeeping purposes only. Please feel free to continue the discussion in part 25 which is available here:

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 25 (by SA7700 Mar 14 2014 in Civil Aviation)

Regards,

SA7700

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net